Quote:
Question # 4:
It can be inferred from the passage that application of ???other mandate??? (see highlighted text) would be unlikely to result in an outcome satisfactory to the female employees in which of the following situations?
I: males employed as long-distance truck drivers for a furniture company make $3.50 more per hour than do females with comparable job experience employed in the same capacity.
II: women working in the office of a cement company contend that their jobs are as demanding and valuable as those of the men working outside in the cement factory, but the women are paid much less per hour.
III: a law firm employs both male and female paralegals with the same educational and career backgrounds, but the same salary for male paralegals is $5,000 more than female paralegals.
A. I only
B. II only
C. III only
D. I and II only
E. I and III only
I am unable to conclude 'B' as the answer. Can someone please share an explanation.
Thanks!
Thanks for the question,
mbaprep2017!
We are looking for situations where applying the "other mandates" (ie mandates besides comparable worth "that can be applied to reduce or eliminate unjustified pay gaps between male and female workers"), would likely result in unsatisfactory outcomes for the female employees. What do we know about those "other mandates"? According to the second sentence of the third paragraph, those other mandates "have not remedied perceived pay inequities satisfactorily for the litigants in cases in which men and women hold different jobs". Thus, we are looking for situations where there is an "unjustified pay gap between male and female workers" and where the "men and women hold different jobs" because those are the situations where the other mandates are unlikely to result in an outcome satisfactory to the female employees:
Option I: Here we are comparing men and women "with comparable job experience employed in the
same capacity." Because the men and women involved hold the same job, the situation does not fit our criteria; nothing in the passage tells us that applying the "other mandates" will result in unsatisfactory outcomes in situations where the men and women hold the same job.
Option II: Here we have men and women holding different jobs (the men are working outside in the cement factory and the women are working inside the office); we also have a pay gap between male and female workers ("the women are paid much less per hour"). This fits our criteria perfectly (different jobs, difference in pay between male and female workers), and it is thus unlikely that application of the "other mandates" will result in an outcome satisfactory to the female employees. (vs application of comparable worth, which would compare the values of the tasks performed in these dissimilar jobs)
Option III: Here we have men and women with the same job, same education, and same career backgrounds. As with Option I, nothing in the passage tells us that applying the "other mandates" will result in unsatisfactory outcomes in situations where the men and women hold the same job.
So only option II describes a situation where the application of the other mandates "would be unlikely to result in an outcome satisfactory to the female employees", so the answer is B.