Why is the Equal Pay Act Such a Dud?

Even after winning another world soccer title, the U.S. Women’s Team faces an uphill battle to win its Equal Pay Act case (the team has alleged other legal violations— those are more promising for them).

What is it about the Equal Pay Act that makes it such a dud?

The law requires equal pay but only when men and women work in jobs that require “equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions.”

That’s why women athletes tend to lose these cases: As stellar as they are, they often are not equal to male counterparts who are situated at the top of their sports.

The law also includes certain “free passes” (called affirmative defenses) for employers who pay men and women unequally. 

One is pay linked to seniority. That sounds neutral enough: But it’s not. People with high seniority in work organizations are usually men (women who are also mothers often interrupt work careers, and this impacts their seniority adversely). So, they can be paid more on grounds of greater seniority.

Other valid defenses: where the work of men and women differ by quality or quantity of production. 

Then there is this catch-all: unequal pay is permitted if there is a reasonable factor other than sex.

Back to the women’s soccer team: It’s sad but true that their sport attracts fewer fans, sponsorships, and also less attendance compared to men. Courts view that as a reasonable factor other than gender (though this so-called rationale bakes in pervasive sex discrimination that creates less fans, less money, and so forth).

Maybe this soccer team can move the ball forward.