We are continuing to explore and to, in a certain degree, investigate a matter that is of concern, I am sure, to Members of our committee, to Members of the Congress, and to our society as a whole. It is an issue that has been before the Congress for many years, as our witnesses and guests know. This issue will be focused in a very real sense in the jurisdiction of this committee in the foreseeable future.

Beginning with the 88th Congress-this is the 97th-with the implementation of Public Law 88-38, which we designated as the Equal Pay Act, this committee, through its members, regardless of party, have sought to assure that women and men are given the same type of treatment in the Nation's work force.

I have been a member of the committee during all of those deliberations. I actively supported that measure, as I have many other legislative programs, to prohibit discrimination against women on any basis.

Now, I think that all of us recognize that the landmark legislation of our effort to prescribe discrimination in the workplace was title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It makes it unlawful to practice employment discrimination in hiring, job classification, promotion, compensation, fringe benefits, discharge, or any other term, and the privileges of employment on the basis of sex are not to be a matter of differential.

Subsequent legislation has, in a sense, refashioned and expanded the prohibition in title VII in other areas of employment and in Federal and federally assisted programs.

Progress has been made toward the goal of eliminating sex-based discrimination in the workplace-the vestiges of the hundreds of years our civilization has operated with two-caste system in employment, however, remain. Much more must be done if we are to attain our desired goal.

I point out that in 1948, the women of this country comprised 28 percent of our labor force. As we meet today, that has risen, I believe, to approximately 51 percent. This trend is anticipated to continue. By 1990 it is anticipated that there will be 83 women in the labor force for every 100 men, an increase from 73 women for every 100 males in 1979.

These figures underscore the need to continue the effort begun in 1962 within the Equal Pay Act to assure that all Americans, men and women, receive fair treatment in the workplace, regardless of their sex.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Randolph.

Senator Williams?

Senator WILLIAMS. I have an opening statement, if I may, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to say that it is particularly appropriate that you have chosen to center the first substantive hearing of this session on sex discrimination in the workplace. Just last year, the Labor and Human Resources Committee held hearings on this issue both in Washington and in Trenton, N.J. I think those hearings were an educational experience for all who participated.

These hearings signify that the committee will continue to focus on this problem and that the quest for social and economic equality

in the workplace will be an enduring commitment for the Labor and Human Resources Committee.

It is my understanding that today's hearings will cover in somewhat broad outline the problems of sex-based pay inequity and sexual harassment in the workplace. I think it is vital that we not regard these as completely discrete difficulties. For, in my judgment, both problems derive from the pernicious and, unfortunately, deeply rooted philosophy that women are interlopers in the workplace with different goals and motivations than men. This viewpoint was rather baldly articulated in one company's industrial relations manual. It stated:

The gradient of the women's wage curve, however, is not the same for women as for men because of the more transient character of the service of the former, the relative shortness of their activity in industry, the differences in environment required, the extra help needed for the occasional heavy work, and the general sociological factors not requiring discussion herein.

That comment was written in 1939. In 1940, the first year historical statistics were compiled, women comprised 25.2 percent of the work force.

In 1979, women comprise 41 percent of this Nation's labor force. The diversity of interest and talents among them as well as the depth of their commitment to their work make the above quotation seem rather fatuous today.

Still, neither the policy nor the effects of systematically shunting women into low prestige and low wage jobs have been eradicated. This problem is so closely connected with the problem of abusive treatment that it is almost unrealistic to discuss the latter without bringing up the former.

We have, of course, made considerable progress since 1939, and I take great pride in this committee's achievements in this area. The 1972 amendments to the Civil Rights Act, which gave the EEOC enforcement authority, the general reorganization of 1978, which expanded the enforcement duties of the EEOC, the Pregnancy Disability Act, and the displaced homemaker provisions now attached to CETA, were among the tangible commitments we made in the last decade to social and economic equality for women.

Although, much to my dismay, the equal rights amendment has not been ratified, I do believe that we have a workable statutory framework for pursuit of this goal-a framework which I trust will remain intact over the next few years. For this reason, I am optimistic that progress can be made.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I might note that I am gravely concerned about a recent study of wages here on Capitol Hill which shows that unfair treatment of women in the workplace sometimes crops up where you least expect it. That study showed various discrepancies between wages paid to female staff assistants on the Hill and male staffers who performed largely the same tasks.

It is not clear to me whether the wage differentials are the result of the more recent arrival of women in the ranks of professional staff members on the Hill, but it impresses me that we should work extra hard to grant them equity in wages which their positions deserve.

I am dubious about the application of Federal statutes to Members of Congress since that raises a host of questions about the

separation of powers and the process of politics which might end up doing more damage than good.

But it seems to me that individual Members of Congress might refine their own efforts at affirmative action so that we can show that we mean what has been written into law.

To be personal, I am late for this meeting, Mr. Chairman, because I was working on exactly that problem in one of the other committees, I think that we all should think positively about this dilemma and describing it just in terms of affirmative action is not acceptable to me.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Williams.

Senator Metzenbaum.

Senator METZENBAUM. I would like to commend you for calling this hearing on sex discrimination in the workplace. I think it is timely. I am glad it is the first hearing of this committee.

According to the President's Commission for a National Agenda for the 1980's, participation of women in the work force has more than doubled since 1900. In 1980 alone, 820,000 new women entered the labor force. But in spite of this enormous growth in numbers, it is a fact that women remained second-class citizens in the workplace. Despite the current law, for example, full-time women workers continue to earn less than their male counterparts. According to the Census Bureau, in 1979, the median income of fully employed white males was $12,372; black males, $7,743; white women, $4,394, and black women, $4,023.

Some have tried to explain away this gap by making adjustments for education, years of experience, continuity of work experience. But these arguments have a hollow ring to the thousands of women actively trying to support families in these inflationary times. These arguments ring false to the 40,000 women in the past year alone, 40,000, that have filed sex discrimination charges with the EEOC.

Arguments are not persuasive to the 80 percent of female workers who are segregated in so-called women's occupations. Those jobs may differ in content from so-called men's jobs, but in many cases, they differ not at all in the level of skills, effort, and responsibility required for success.

Finally, I do not think that women who are fired or denied promotions when they object to sexual harassment will be impressed by talk about continuity and experience. It is time to recognize that women will constitute a large and growing part of the Nation's work force more and more each year. It is time to open up for women the full range of opportunity.

In the corporate world today, only 5 percent of the middlemanagement jobs are filled by women. Only 1 percent of top executive positions are held by women. That is an absurdity.

In the skilled crafts, women account for only 6 percent of the work force. In Federal job training programs, women are not provided equal training opportunities. Today's fringe benefit programs, they are not responsive to the needs of working women. Clearly, we need better access to adequate child care services and adequate retirement benefits for spouses. This country cannot afford to retreat from its commitment to full opportunity.

76-638 0-81--2

Teal Employment Opportunity Commission has helped Tons of Americans receive the full protection to which they we examed. It should be strengthened, not dismantled, as some Tut suggested.

Office of Federal Contract Compliance Practices has insured utt people doing business with the Federal Government make every attempt to provide opportunities to women and minorities. Font, that is an effort that should be strengthened.

We actually should be sitting here today talking about how we Bergen and how we further the efforts of these agencies in wishing their missions, which is to bring women into the work force as full partners.

ink it is time in this Nation that we open up opportunities to women in the workplace rather than deregulating the price of oil. I x it will be a much more significant act for the President at & point.

A CHAIRMAN. I have to admit, Howard, you always have a way getting your point across.

Without any further comment, our first panel will be Joan

in, executive director of the National Commission on Working Women; Shirley Sandage, president, Displaced Homemakers Netwk, Inc.; Karen Nussbaum, of the Working Women-National Association of Office Workers; and Jane Fleming, executive direcof Wider Opportunities for Women.

Ms. Goodin will be introduced by Senator Kassebaum, and Ms. Sandage will be introduced by Senator Grassley. So we would be happy to call these Senators to the table, along with Joan Goodin, Shirley Sandage, Karen Nussbaum, and Jane Fleming.

We will go in whatever order you women would like to go. I hope you have agreed which order you want to go in and we will proceed.

Senator KASSEBAUM. I will go before Chuck.

Mr. Chairman, first I would like to say it is a pleasure for me to be here to introduce a woman whom I have known in the 2 years that I have worked with the National Commission on Working Women. I would like to commend you for calling this hearing this morning on what I think is a very important topic-the concerns of working women. By means of this hearing, you are analyzing and evaluating some of those concerns.

So often we think of only the 20 percent of women who are involved in the higher levels of management and the professions, forgetting the very real concerns and inequities that have existed for the 80 percent of the women who work in low-level positions. These women comprise a predominant, important part of our economy. Increased productivity which we talk about so much today as an essential element in stabilizing our economy, is a very large part of the contribution that women make to our industrial sector. I would like to say in introducing Joan Goodin that I think one of the strongest assets of the National Commission on Working Women is their commonsense approach to these issues; and so it is a pleasure for me to introduce Joan and in fact, the whole panel that you have brought forward today.

Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

We are grateful to you for taking time out of your busy schedule to come and introduce Ms. Goodin.

Senator Grassley, we are glad to have you here and will be interested in what you have to say in your introduction.

Senator GRASSLEY. Mr. Chairman, Senator Kennedy, other members, it is a pleasure for me to introduce Shirley Sandage, whom I have known for 8 years. In her capacity as a leader in bringing to the public's attention the problems of working women Shirley has served not only as a resource for me, but also as a person who could prick my conscience to be more aware of the problems of women in American society-particularly their economic problems. So for my last 2 years in the Iowa Legislature, and my 6 years in the U.S. House of Representatives, I have had an opportunity to visit her in the environment where she worked and where she promotes the causes in which she is involved. I have also read many letters from her on the many legislative issues that are before the Congress of the United States.

So I feel I am introducing not only a person who is a leader and a theoretician, but one who is actually a practitioner. Shirley Sandage works with the mechanics of carrying this out. She comes to you today in her capacity as president-elect of the displaced homemakers network.

She is also director of a program in Mason City, Iowa-a community-based organization serving citizens in north central Iowa. She is also a member of the board of the Older Women's Club, which has chapters throughout the State.

I think you will find her expertise very valuable to this committee while you consider not only oversight but legislation to carry out the essential consideration in a participatory democracy of equal rights for all.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Grassley.

We are grateful to you for being here and taking time out of your schedule. We are grateful to you and your constituent.

If we could, unless there is an objection, why don't you proceed, Ms. Goodin.

STATEMENTS OF JOAN GOODIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COMMISSION ON WORKING WOMEN; SHIRLEY SANDAGE, PRESIDENT, DISPLACED HOMEMAKERS NETWORK, INC.; KAREN NUSSBAUM, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, WORKING WOMEN-NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF OFFICE WORKERS; AND JANE FLEMING, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WIDER OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN, ACCOMPANIED BY AVRIL MADISON, A PANEL

Ms. GOODIN. I want to thank Senator Kassebaum for her lovely, warm introduction, and for her support for the 80 percent.

I am Joan Goodin, executive director of the National Commission on Working Women, a nongovernmental, action-oriented body which for 3 years now has functioned as an effective coalition of corporate executives, labor union officials, educators, media representatives' grassroots working women, and Members of Congressamong whom are Senator Nancy Kassebaum, Senator Matsunaga, and Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder.