Prepared statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.--Continued "A Report from the Commission on the Status of Women in the Bratfisch, Virginia, president, California NOW, letter to chancellor Equal opportunities for men and women in New York State, a Page 169 202 161 Grade changes in number of full-time librarians (table) – 161 161 157 Platform on Women's Rights, New Democratic Coalition, New 177 "Preliminary Report on the Status of Women at Harvard," an 183 Sex discrimination guidelines_ Statement of....... "Quotations and Incidents Heard and Observed Informally on "The Half-Eaten Apple," a newspaper article entitled 200 148 209 212 "Why Doesn't Business Hire More College-Trained Women?" 174 "Women at Wisconsin," a booklet entitled_ 190 "Women in the Labor Force," an article entitled. 180 "Women in the World of Work," an article entitled. 172 Shaw, Mrs. Daisy K., director, Educational and Vocational Guidance of New York City: Letter to Chairman Green, dated July 13, 1970___ 449 446 DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, 1970 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:20 a.m. in room 2261, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edith Green (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Green, Hathaway, Perkins, Quie, and Steiger. Staff members present: Harry Hogan, counsel; Robert C. Andringa, minority professional staff assistant. (Text of section 805 of H.R. 16098 follows:) PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION SEC. 805. (a) Section 601 of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended to read as follows: "SEC. 601. No person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, sex, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." (b) Section 702 of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is amended by the insertion of a period after "activities" and the deletion of the remainder of the sentence. (c) That paragraph (1) of subsection (a) of section 104 of the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (42 U.S.C. 1975c (a)) is amended by inserting immediately after "religion," the following: "sex", and paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) of subsection (a) of such section 104 are each amended by inserting immediately after "religion" the following: ", sex". (d) Section 13 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 is amended by the insertion after the words "the provisions of section 6" of the following language "(except section 6(d) in the case of paragraph (1)).” Mrs. GREEN. The subcommittee will come to order for the further consideration of legislation that is under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee. It is with a great sense of personal pleasure that I welcome to the subcommittee today witnesses who will offer testimony on section 805 of H.R. 16098. Section 805 would amend the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in federally financed programs and would remove the exemption presently existing in title VII of the Civil Rights Act with respect to those in education. It would authorize the Civil Rights Commission to study discrimination against women and lastly would remove the exemption of executive, administrative, and professional employees from the equal pay for equal work provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act. (1) It is to be hoped that the enactment of the provisions would be of some help in eliminating the discrimination against women which still permeates our society. It seems ironic that in a period when we are more concerned with civil rights and liberties than ever before in our history-when minorities have vigorously asserted themselves-that discrimination against a very important majority-women-has been given little attention. Increasingly women are constituting a greater proportion of our labor force. As of April of this year there were 31,293,000 women in the labor market constituting nearly 40 percent of the total. However, despite the growth in the number of women working today, the proportion of women in the professions is lower in this country than in most countries throughout the world. While the United States prides itself in being a leader of nations, it has been backward in its treatment of its working women. Professionally, women in the United States constitute only 9 percent of all full professors, 8 percent of all scientists, 6.7 percent of all physicians, 3.5 percent of all lawyers, and 1 percent of all engineers. Despite the fact that the Federal Government through Democratic and Republican administrations has given lip service to the equal opportunities for employment of women, the very large majority are in the lower grades of Civil Service and only a small portion in policymaking or administrative positions. Despite increases in earnings, income and wage statistics illustrate dramatically a deep discrimination against women. The average median income for women working full-time year around is $4,457. The comparable figure for men is $7,664. We have been concerned, and rightly so, about discrimination against the Negro in our society-about the Negro man who averages $5,603-only 69.9 percent of the average earnings for a white man. But I hear little concern expressed for women who average only 58 percent in comparison. The average wage in the United States is: Negro women, $3,677; white women, $4,700; Negro men, $5,603; white men, $8,014. The sorry fact is also that the gap in earning power is widening. In 1956, for example, women's median income of $2,827 was 64 percent of the $4,466 received by men. Women's median wage or salary income rose to $3,973 in 1966 while men's rose to $6,848. So, although both groups experienced increases, women's income increased at a slower rate and their median income in 1966 was only 58 percent of that of men-a 6-percent drop in the 10year period. Many of us would like to think of educational institutions as being far from the maddening crowd, where fair play is the rule of the game and everyone, including women, gets a fair roll of the dice. Let us not deceive ourselves our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy. Initially many women are required to meet higher admission standards than men. While the Federal Government and the Office of Education, in effect, though their policies, encourage college admission standards to be waived for certain individuals, they have shown ab solutely no concern over the higher admission requirements set for women in many institutions. Our colleague from Michigan, Representative Martha Griffiths, cited instances recently where at the University of North Carolina admission of women on the freshman level is "restricted to those who are especially well qualified." There is no similar restriction for male students. In the State of Virginia, I am advised, during a 3-year period, 21,000 women were turned down for college entrance, while not one male student was rejected. On the graduate level, not too surprisingly, the situation worsens. Sex differences in rank and salary at colleges and universities have also been reported by the Women's Bureau of the Department of Labor. A recent report by the Bureau pointed out that "in institutions of higher education women are much less likely than men to be associate or full professors." And citing a 1966 study by the NEA the report states that in 1965-66, "women full professors had a median salary of only $11,649 compared with $12,758 for men." Total Federal support to institutions of higher education amounted to $3,367 million in fiscal year 1968. Over 2,100 universities and colleges participated in that support. The President's Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Order 11375, specifically forbids sex discrimination by Federal contractors. However, colleges and universities are still receiving Federal contracts, and although forbidden by Executive order from discriminating against women, nevertheless continue in this course. I think this warrants our attention and the attention of the administration. In Federal civil service, as well as in political appointments, there has been lip service in regard to equal opportunities for women but in reality there has been no change through Democratic or Republican administrations. The National Congress and State legislatures have always been the best proof that this indeed is a man's world-and too often discrimination against women has been either systematically or subconsciously carried out. In hearings I expect this to be well documented in our tax laws, in social security benefits, in labor unions which through the years negotiated contracts paying women less than men for identical work. Of course, invariably the negotiatiors for both management and labor have been men. Women do make up over 50 percent of the population, and yet in civil service we find that the women under grade 3, there are 142,867; they make up 21 percent of all the workers and according to 1968 figures, if we take grades 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, the lowest paid civil service positions, we find that women make up 86 percent of these grade levels in civil service, and that in grades 8 through 18, women make up only 13 percent of the total civil service labor force. When we get to grade 13, less than 1 percent-six-tenths of 1 percent women. In grade 14, three-tenths of 1 percent, in grade 15, onetenth of 1 percent. In grades 16, 17 and 18 less than 1 percent in each grade-and above grade 18 there are 16 women in the entire Federal civil service. CIVIL SERVICE STATISTICS In 1968 667,234 women were employed in full time white collar civil service positions. I asked for figures the other day from the Office of Education and HEW, in regard to the number of women employees in policymaking positions. The Office of Education has told me an hour ago that they could not get these figures for me. We do have them for HEW, and we find that out of 15,977 employees in grades 12 and up, 2,666 are women. In HEW, there are only 10 women employees at grade 16. Out of 72 total employees at grade 17, there are only 3 women, and at grade level 18, there is not a single woman in the present Federal civil service in HEW. The grade levels are in the chart attached. Mrs. GREEN. As I said before, this seems to me to be ample evidence of the discrimination which does exist throughout our Government. As I said, during the next several days I hope that the various kinds of discrimination against women in our society will be discussed and will be fully documented, and that this can be made available to the men who run the world. [Laughter.] Today, we will have as witnesses before our committee two of my women colleagues in the House. When they do come in, I will interrupt and call upon them, because they have other committee meetings which they must attend. But may I now invite to the table Mrs. Myra Ruth Harmon, president of the National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs; Jean Ross, chairman of the National Legislative Committee of the American Association of University Women; Dr. Elizabeth Boyer, |