Gender differences in agency head salaries: the case of public education.(Statistical Data Included)

Nearly 40 years have gone by since the passage of the Equal Pay Act, the first modern statute directed at protecting workers against wage discrimination. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 prohibits unequal pay for equal or "substantially equal" work performed by men and women. (1) This legislation was quickly followed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibited wage discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin, Together, these laws have revolutionized the American workplace. Despite the advancements made by women in the workforce, however, sex-based wage discrimination has persisted. Indeed, the Department of Labor reports that in 1999, women earned approximately 77 percent as much as men did, up little more than a dime since 1963. African American and Latina women fare worse at 65 percent and 59 percent, respectively (DOLL 1999). (2)

Although women are making great strides in certain labor sectors (Blau and Kahn 1994), many problems remain. A preponderance of studies on the public employment distribution of women and men provides evidence that women often face glass ceilings and glass walls at the federal and state levels (Baron and Newman 1989; Bullard and Wright 1993; Cornwell and Kellough 1994; Crampton, Hodge, and Mishra 1997; Crum and Naif 1997; Guy 1992; Kellough 1989; Lewis and Emmert 1986; Lewis and Nice 1994; Mani 1997, 1999; Naif and Thomas 1994; Newman 1994; Pfeffer and Davis-Blake 1987; Reid, Kerr, and Miller 2000). In this work, we extend the analysis to examine gender differences in salary among a set of administrators who have reached the top of the organizational ladder, school superintendents.

Researchers have predicted that as more women occupy line positions in school districts (such as assistant superintendents or principals), we will see more women become superintendents (Schmuck 1992). This, however, has not been the case. Nationally, only about 4 percent of district superintendents are women, while more than 20 percent of line district office positions are filled by women (Schuster and Foote 1990). In her study on the promotion of teachers to administrative positions, Joy (1998) finds that men are more likely than women to be selected for promotion during the school year, even when the teacher's desire for promotions and credentials are considered. Examining the explanations for the small percentage of women superintendents is beyond the scope of this work, but we take an important step in assessing sex-based wage disparities among individuals who have become superintendents. (3)

Two objectives guide this article. The first is whether gender has any unique effect on superintendent salaries, above and beyond the effects of income-related factors such as human capital, local resources, and job performance. To address this question, we assess the salaries of male and female school superintendents in Texas over time (1995-98) to determine whether sex-based wage disparities exist. Superintendents are an interesting case because well-educated women have long been employed by schools, yet few have become superintendents. The second objective is to illustrate how gender differences should be assessed, thus creating a template for future researchers and practitioners seeking to examine this question in other public organizations.

Prior Studies of Gender Discrimination in Salaries

Numerous studies of sex-based salary disparities have demonstrated unequivocally the existence and persistence of salary disparities in both the private and public sectors. Although the private sector has made some progress toward pay equity (Furchgott-Ruth and Stolba 1996; O'Neill 1985; O'Neill and Polachek 1993), significant sex-based pay gaps continue (Groshen 1991; Macpherson and Hirsch 1995; Sorensen 1987; Hultin and Szulkin 1999). In these studies, the gaps remain even after researchers control for human capital differences such as education, years of experience, tenure in current job, and the education level of the employee.

Similar research in the public sector has produced analogous results. Several studies using aggregate data on public-sector wages provide strong evidence of sex-based pay disparities at all levels of government (Bullard and Wright 1993; Lewis and Emmert 1986; Miller, Kerr and Reid 1999; Lewis and Nice 1994; Pfeffer and Davis-Blake 1987; Reid, Kerr and Miller 2000). These disparities have been linked to gender composition at the occupational level (Lewis and Nice 1994; Pfeffer and Davis-Blake 1987), at the organizational level (Lewis and Emmert 1986; Blau and Kahn 1999), and at the job level (Treiman and Hartmann 1981). Pfeffer and Davis-Blake (1987) demonstrate in their study of college and university administrators that the proportion of female incumbents depressed wages for both male and female administrators. In recent research on glass ceilings in U.S. state-level bureaucracies, Reid, Kerr and Miller (2000) conclude that women are underrepresented in higher-paying positions (in proportion to their numbers in the agency). This previous research provides a rich foundation for our inquiry into whether gender has any unique effect on superintendent salaries. (3)