Academic

Sex Discrimination Report at Rutgers

By Kathy Stanchi

A faculty committee recently completed an internal report regarding the allegations of several women political science profs at Rutgers. The report documented significant pay disparities between male and female profs, sexual harassment and other forms of sex discrimination. You can read about it in the Philadelphia Inquirer or in the Chronicle of Higher Ed (need subscription).  The Chronicle was the first to report about this.

As a student of male/female pay inequity in the academy, I was particularly interested by the quotes from the Rutgers faculty union reps that concerns over male/female prof pay disparity are "longstanding." The Inquirer cited one example in which a female poli sci prof made $113,000 after 35 years of service, and a male prof was making $123,000 after only 16.  That is a very significant disparity. 

The idea that a junior male faculty member is making a higher salary than a very senior female faculty member makes me angry, but I have no doubt that this is going on in law schools all over the place.  When you combine this with the scholarship (read Nancy Levit's article on Keeping Feminism in Its Place) that shows that women law professors are doing more of the "domestic" work (e.g. the committee and administrative work) of the law school, a familiar, but disturbing, social pattern emerges.  The problem is that with law schools, the salary decisions, made largely by the dean, are shrouded in secrecy. I have no idea what my colleagues are making, in part because of the 'taboo' against discussing money, because those favored with higher salaries are not inclined to share with others, and because those with lower salaries might feel ashamed.  Certain organizations compile averages, but this only gets you so far. Without concrete information, women can't know for sure -- or prove -- that they are getting shafted on salary as compared to men.

I truly must say that I do not understand why salary decisions are not more public and/or more transparent.  Secrecy certainly, in this instance, seems to undermine equality, and shouldn't the quest for equality trump Emily Post? 

Full post as published by The Faculty Lounge on October 10, 2008 (boomark / email).