There is an intriguing note to the current call upon civil rights law

There is an intriguing note to the current call upon civil rights law to help remedy the undervaluation of women’s work. Until fairly recently, government was not expected to solve workers’ economic grievances, however valid they might be. Many assumed that the responsibility lay with workers themselves. Collective bargaining was the preferred instrument for pursuing pay equity for women. Rather than call upon the law to regulate the market from the outside, one could try to reshape or otherwise influence the market so that women themselves would be better able to address the problem. This could be done by raising absolute wage levels in low paying, predominantly female industries (such as retail clothing) or by changing the pay relationship between largely female and largely male occupations within a single industry, such as auto manufacturing. Through union representation, employees in traditionally female jobs in an industry could identify the actual degree of underpayment of their work and then, as a group, pressure their employer to remedy it. In addition, this process would encourage those affected-men and women alike-to be sensitive to the limits of available resources, to be pragmatic about the pace at which the wage structure could be revised.

I do not mean to suggest that collective bargaining is a foolproof means for closing the gender gap in wages. To the extent that the problem involves the undervaluation of nonunion female occupations in an otherwise unionized industry, political hurdles will discourage unionized employees from supporting revisions in the wage structure. And to the extent that the problem is the concentration of women in low-paying industries- textiles, for example-the product market imposes serious economic constraints on a substantial closing of the wage gap.

Despite the imperfections of tools like collective bargaining for redressing wage disparities between men and women, a reliance on law or government is favorable for neither individual firms nor our economy as a whole. Nonetheless, although opponents of mandatory public remedies may correctly fear those remedies as being a cure worse than the disease, they are wrong when they imply that the current system of wage determination by business management is perfectly healthy.

1. In line 10 (Bolded), this most likely refers to

(A) increasing the wages of women and men in a single industry
(B) bringing about changes in market conditions
(C) changing the dynamic of collective bargaining
(D) relying on civil rights law to remedy economic grievances
(E) applying group pressure on an employer


2. According to the author, the process of unionization and collective bargaining could do all of the following EXCEPT

(A) overcome market pressures that keep wages in some industries lower than in others
(B) encourage worker flexibility in adjusting a new pay scale to economic conditions
(C) help workers to apply group pressure on employers
(D) aid in determining the degree to which women are being underpaid
(E) sensitize workers to the limits of their industry’s ability to institute change


3. Which of the following best summarizes the author’s main point?

(A) Pay inequity for women exists because of the lack of unionization in traditionally female occupations.
(B) Government regulation of industry to achieve pay equity for women is unnecessary because management has the power to effectively determine wages.
(C) Unionization would solve all industry problems relating to the valuation of women’s work.
(D) Government regulation of women’s wages is necessary only in those industries where collective bargaining is ineffective.
(E) Collective bargaining is preferable to government actions in redressing the undervaluation of women’s work.


4. The author mentions textiles (Highlighted) in order to

(A) demonstrate the potential harm of government regulation of industry
(B) outline a strategy for achieving pay equity for women
(C) indicate how quickly employees can reasonably expect to achieve pay equity
(D) give an example of a situation in which collective bargaining may be ineffective
(E) show why civil rights laws are the most important tool for increasing women’s wages


5. It can be inferred that the author’s attitude toward opponents of government regulation of wage determination mentioned in the last paragraph is characterized by which of the following?

I. Distrust of their motives
II. Sympathy with some of their concerns
III. Disagreement with some of their assumptions
IV. Opposition to their political principles

(A) I only
(B) III only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and IV


6. In the final paragraph, the author addresses “opponents of mandatory public remedies” (Highlighted) by

(A) arguing that those remedies would benefit the economy
(B) implying that alternative methods of correcting wage disparities would be worse
(C) asserting that the present approach to setting wages is flawed
(D) defending civil rights legislation as a solution to social problems
(E) insisting that those remedies are a viable means of correcting wage disparities


7. The passage refers to which of the following as reasons for preferring collective bargaining to legislation as a method of ending the undervaluation of women’s work?

I. The greater responsiveness of collective bargaining to existing conditions that affect wage levels
II. The general desirability of using private rather than public remedies
III. The potential of collective bargaining for achieving a uniform national solution to the problem of gender wage disparities

(A) I only
(B) III only
(C) I and II only
(D) II and III only
(E) I, II, and III