In 2011, AstraZeneca agreed to pay a settlement in the amount of $250,000 to a group of female pharmaceutical employees that had made the case that they were paid, on average, less than their male counterparts. This would roughly amount to them making around $1700 less than their coworkers who were of the opposite sex. The company was also required to implement a variety of control variables that would help them to maintain a more equal-based pay system (Lipman 2). These variables include age, time employed at the company, specialty, performance ratings, and initial hiring circumstances. These variables are required to be considered alongside differences in pay in order to maintain a more equal pay system. This agreement was considered to be notable due to the wide-ranging enforcement criteria that the company is required to adhere to (Gutman 1). This aggressive stance was taken by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) which settled the lawsuit with AstraZeneca. “In addition to the group who will receive compensation, AstraZeneca along with OFCCP will review records of female employees in fourteen states and if additional statistical evidence of wage discrimination is found, the company must remedy it” (Hoopes 3). Presently, AstraZeneca is only one of a few firms that routinely release information related to pay gaps. This allows them to establish a stronger internal pressure to work towards closing such gaps. This seems to indicate that past gender-discrepancies in pay did occur and the company is working hard to overcome the challenges of equal pay.
1. Explain how the "point method" job evaluation and compensation system could best be used to assist them in preventing future unfair discrimination charges. Using the point method job evaluation and compensation system various factors are considered for which compensation can be given depending on the degree to which such factors are present on the job. In using this method, the objective consideration of the specific functions of a particular role are the only criteria by which various compensations such as salary increases or bonuses can be given. In determining the most important factors associated with a specific role and then assigning these factors points based on degrees of importance points can be allocated that effectively reflect the level of success that an employee has had at a specific position. In addressing employee activities in such a reliable and systematic way can help to reduce the level of personal bias that is at work when implementing such studies. In selecting the key jobs for study, dividing them into major and minor sub-groups, understanding the maximum and minimum number of points that should be considered for each job, and totaling the points associated with a specific job employers can be better equipped to effectively assess and direct the overall motivations and success of their employers. The compensation that is provided to both men and women, as well as other groups, can, in this way, be based on their personal accomplishments rather than other subjective criteria being directed by those implementing the analysis. “The starting point is the principle of equal pay for jobs of equal value, and the proposal is to use a quantitative evaluation method that classifies jobs by means of a points system, with different factors determining the final evaluation” (Corominas et al. 2). In choosing and critically considering the underlying criteria that these evaluations are based on, it can be ensured that unwanted indirect gender biases do not occur, which helps to effectively combat concerns of discrimination. In coming to a decision based on neutral criteria managers can be equipped to avoid unfair discrimination charges in the future.
Works Cited
Corominas, A., Coves, A.-M., Lusa, A., Martínez, C., Ortega, M.A. Against Gender
Discrimination in Pay Structures: Equal Pay for Equal Value and Job Evaluation. The
Dessler, Gary. Human Resources Management. Pearson: Thirteenth Ed. 2013. Print.
