SUMMARY The 1980 Capitol Hill Women's Political Caucus study is an assessment of the employment situation for women on the staffs of House and Senate members. For both houses of Congress, the study shows a lack of representation of women in top level jobs. With few exceptions, pay discrepancies exist between women and men in nearly every job category. On average, female salaries were substantially lower than male salaries. * * * In the House, the average salary for women was $15,989, while the In the Senate, women fared worse. The average salary for women was For both the House and the Senate combined, the average female salary Salaries of women, more so than those of men, tended to be clustered at the lower end of the salary range. * In the House, nearly 80% of all women earned salaries below $20,000. About half of the men earned below $20,000. In the Senate also, over three-fourths of the women were paid less than $20,000, while only 45% of men earned less than $20,000. Women were more likely than men to have the type of job that paid less. * In both the House and the Senate, eight of the nine lowest paying job SUMMARY The 1980 Capitol Hill Women's Political Caucus study is an assessment of the employment situation for women on the staffs of House and Senate members. For both houses of Congress, the study shows a lack of representation of women in top level jobs. With few exceptions, pay discrepancies exist between women and men in nearly every job category. On average, female salaries were substantially lower than male salaries. * In the House, the average salary for women was $15,989, while the * * In the Senate, women fared worse. The average salary for women was For both the House and the Senate combined, the average female salary Salaries of women, more so than those of men, tended to be clustered at the lower end of the salary range. * In the House, nearly 80% of all women earned salaries below $20,000. About half of the men earned below $20,000. In the Senate also, over three-fourths of the women were paid less than $20,000, while only 45% of men earned less than $20,000. Women were more likely than men to have the type of job that paid less. In both the House and the Senate, eight of the nine lowest paying job -11 In the same type of job, women tended to earn less than men. ⭑ In the House, women's average salary was less than men's in 13 out of 19 Job categories. In the Senate, in 14 out of 19 job categories, the average salary of women was lower than the average salary of men. Few women are in legislative jobs of high responsibility and pay. In three closely-related job categories (legislative director, legislative assistant, and legislative correspondent) in both the House and Senate, the percentage of women decreased as responsibility and pay increased. Fewer women than men held policy-making jobs. ⭑ Only 16% of all women on House staffs held policy-making jobs, compared to 46% of all men. In the Senate, 14% of women were in policy-making positions; 49% of men held policy-making jobs. On the other hand, women were more likely than men to hold clerical jobs. ⭑ In the House, 37% of women, compared to only 7% of men held clerical jobs. In the Senate, 41% of all female employees held clerical positions, compared to only 7% of males. In both Houses, political party was not a factor in salary differentials between women and men. INTRODUCTION Nearly a decade ago, a handful of women committed to equal rights gathered in a room on Capitol Hill to share their common concerns about America's most powerful institution Congress. As employees of the House and the Senate, these women believed they had unique opportunities, but they also faced substantial obstacles. Their opportunities feminists in Congress - - to influence national policy and to support seemed to be an exciting prospect. But there were obstacles. They found glaring inequities in the employment opportunities offered to women and men in Congressional offices. Capitol Hill workers had little recourse, however, because Congress had exempted itself from all civil rights laws. The group quickly sensed that, generally, salaries paid to women employed in Congress were less than salaries paid to men, that women held comparatively few policy-making positions, and that they were promoted to professional jobs less often than were men. For female workers to be treated fairly, and for them to make the most of their opportunity to pursue legislative goals, these obstacles had to be overcome. With that ambitious agenda, the Capitol Hill Women's Political Caucus began. Ten years later, that small group has grown in number to 500 women and men, and is affiliated with the National Women's Political Caucus. The agenda remains the same, for Congress has not yet officially addressed the issue of improving the status of women on Congressional staffs. This report marks the second time the Capitol Hill Women's Political Caucus has undertaken a study comparing the salaries paid to men and women on Capitol Hill. The first study (Capitol Hill Women's Political Caucus, "Sexists in the Senate? A Study of Differences in Salary by Sex Among Employees of the U.S. Senate. May 1975), focused on Senate employees and the discrepancies found between the salaries paid to men and those paid to women performing equivalent jobs. It demonstrated that professional women employed in the Senate were paid $5,000 less than their male counterparts. In 1979, the Supreme Court ruled that Congressional employees have the right to sue their employers for damages on grounds of sex discrimination in employment. In 1974, Shirley Davis received a letter from her boss, |