It does not go far enough, in my opinion, but, as far as it goes, it is a good bill. I am happy that we are getting a good start in this legislation in eliminating the unfairness of unequal pay for women when doing the same work as men.

I have made my views on this legislation clear enough, often enough, on previous occasions in insertions in the Congressional Record and in remarks here in the House, both this year and in previous Congresses, and also in testimony before the committee each time the issue arosethat I do not think I have to say anything further now except that the legislation will add a further important dimension to our laws intended to assure fair treatment for all American workers. Women make up one-third of our total labor force. In this legislation, we are endorsing the principle of assuring them fair, nondiscriminatory treatment on pay for the work they perform in the Nation's commercial and industrial life.

(Daily Congressional Record, 8692–8694, House, May 23, 1963.) Mr. CAREY. ***

Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 6060, the Equal Pay Act of 1963. It seems strange that the policy of equal pay for equal work should be in controversy-should need champions and vocal support in a year as far advanced in our history as 1963. We have lived for many years, since 1789, under a Constitution which proclaimsand in many instances expressly provides safeguards for the principle of equality.

The failure to right the wrong of the unequal pay is a dark spot on our national consciousness. It should be said by the Congress, however, that it is a blind spot. Its existence has been pointed out to us over too long a period of time and too forcibly. Last year this House passed an equal pay bill, as did the Senate. The Senate action, it will be recalled, was late in the session and the two enactments failed to be reconciled before Congress adjourned.

Many of my colleagues doubtless have been confronted by unequal pay practices or seen them in operation in one form or another over the years. We have probably seen them touch the experience and the lives of many persons and may have noted that the effect is an affront to human dignity. In the proudness of our democratic heritage, I believe we all smart under injustices, no matter the degree.

*

(Daily Congressional Record, 8695, House, May 23, 1963.)

Mr. STAGGERS. Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of the immediate passage of H.R. 6060, the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

This legislation, which would prohibit discrimination because of sex in the payment of wages by employers in commerce, has been introduced in every session of Congress for almost the past 20 years by Members of both parties. Personally, I cannot see dillydallying any longer. The time has come for action-in fact, it is long overdue. I join my colleagues in supporting this bill.

It is my sincere belief that there should be no difference in wage rates for men and women who do the same work. If both are paid equally for equal work, not only will women be protected but men as well. The employer who pays a woman a lower wage for the same work will also

hire cheap labor. In areas of chronic unemployment, this equal pay legislation will protect the jobs of men as well as assure women who must work that they will receive a fair wage.

Most women work to contribute to essential living expenses. Millions of single women work to support themselves; many working women are heads of families, and others are the primary wage earner in the family although they are not technically the family head. Many, many thousands of single women support one or both parents and in many cases other members of their families who are in need.

I truly believe the working woman deserves equality in every respect, not only the voting privilege which has already been made her right, but also her right to equal pay for equal service.

(Daily Congressional Record, 8696, House, May 23, 1963.)

Mr. RYAN of New York. Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 6060, the equal-pay-for-equal-work bill.

I should like to commend our colleague, the gentlewoman from Oregon, Edith Green, for her role in advancing this legislation. She has introduced equal pay bills ever since her election to the House. Last year she sponsored the administration bill for equal pay. As a member of the President's Commission on the Status of Women, the gentlewoman from Oregon [Mrs. Green] has worked with dedication and determination to see that women receive equal treatment with men in employment.

Mr. Chairman, I support this bill to provide justice in the pay envelope to both men and women by forbidding employers in interstate commerce to discriminate among their employees on the basis of the sex of the worker in setting rates of pay.

Discrimination in the form of a rate differential for comparable work when performed by women instead of men is based on the incredible notion that a woman, although she may accomplish as much or more, deserves less pay than a man. It is shocking to think that an employer would pay a woman less than a man for doing the same work. We may not be aware of the role women have come increasingly to play in the economic life of America.

By 1970 it is estimated that the number of women workers will approach 30 million. In 1920 there were about a quarter of that number, 8.2 million. The place of women in our labor force has changed since 1920. Traditionally, they were only temporarily a part of that force. A girl left school, worked for a few years, married, and left the labor force for good. This picture of the place of women in the labor force was sufficiently accurate to gain a wide degree of acceptance although it was never the full picture.

Today it is not true at all. Whereas, as recently as 1930, 40 percent of women workers were under 25 years of age and less than 20 percent over 45, today the proportions are reversed. Less than 20 percent in 1960 were under 25 and nearly 40 percent were over 45. Women enter the labor force, leave it temporarily to have children, and return to it, for good. In 1930, 29 percent of working women were married. In 1961, 61 percent of the women who work were married. This is one of the significant and major changes in our labor force in this generation. Workingwomen are as much a permanent part of the labor force as the workingmen.

Mr. Chairman, wage discrimination based on sex should have no place in our American economic structure. As long as such discrimination exists, whether against men or women, the American economy will suffer. Enactment of this bill will be another forward step in providing equality and justice in the labor market. However, the House still has an unfulfilled responsibility to enact a comprehensive measure to eliminate discrimination in employment based on race, creed, color, or national origin as well as sex.

Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Chairman, as our immediate inspiration to unanimously approve this legislation, the Equal Pay Act of 1963, we need only to look around us and observe the most competent, industrious, distinguished and gracious ladies whom we are privileged to call our colleagues.

I know we will agree that these distinguished lady legislators work as hard and as diligently as any male Member of the Congress and indeed, by their gracious presence, contribute more to this body than any male Member. There is no thought here of a differentiation in legislative salary because of sex.

For our background inspiration to promptly and favorably act on this bill, we need only to reflect that it is designed simply and solely to provide wage justice for working women.

Under the legislative proposal before us now, we can accomplish this just objective without the creation of any new Government compliance unit and through procedures of the Fair Labor Standards Act, with which labor and industry have long been familiar.

We all realize that the origin of the wage rate differential for men and women performing comparable jobs is the false concept that a woman, because of her very nature, somehow or other should not be given as much money as a man for similar work.

This antiquated concept has been long and completely demonstrated to be false and it is indefensible from every standpoint. This being so, we may wonder why this legislation is necessary.

The answer is furnished to us in the authoritative information provided by witnesses before the House Committee on Education and Labor and the impressive array of statistics unhappily proving that discrimination in wage payments, on the basis of sex alone, continues to exist even in this modern space age.

Recognizing that the concept of wage payment discrimination against women is false; having before us the surprising but overwhelming evidence that such discrimination still continues to exist: and realizing that this measure represents the correction of basic injustice being visited upon women in many fields of endeavor, let us, I urge you, firmly reject any crippling amendments and proceed immediately and unanimously to the enactment of this bill extending simple wage justice to the increasing corps of America's working

women.

Mr. COHELAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this important and long-overdue legislation to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in the payment of wages.

The right of equal opportunity is one of the great pledges of this country. It is a pledge which in the field of employment should mean

the right of women to receive pay equal to that of men for work of a comparable nature, for work requiring comparable skill. The hearings conducted by the House Committee on Education and Labor and the studies done by the Department of Labor, however, make it very clear that this is not the case today; that discrimination in pay on the basis of sex continues to exist; that unequal pay has not been nearly so eliminated in practice as it has in theory.

It is obvious and true that there are certain types of work which can be best performed by men. It is equally true that there are other types of work in which women excel. In each case pay should be commensurate with the work.

There is, though, a great middle ground, a large number of positions or jobs, which men and women can perform with equal ability. In these positions there should be no distinction in pay based on sex; women should not be asked or expected to accept wages less than that paid to men.

This legislation, Mr. Chairman, would enable us to take an important step toward this goal; it would enable us to remove an economic waste we can ill afford, and I urge that it be approved without delay.

(Daily Congressional Record, 8700-8701, House, May 23, 1963.)

Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill. As the sponsor of similar legislation, my bill being H.R. 1624 introduced on January 10, 1963, I fully back the gentlewoman from Oregon [Mrs. Green] and highly commend her superb work on this issue. The objectives of H.R. 6060 are highly desirable and are long overdue, and I strongly urge this House to give it an overwhelming vote of approval. This bill will go far in eliminating a thoroughly inequitable employment practice. It will establish wage justice for working women. will create equal opportunity regardless of sex, in industries engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce. Enactment of this bill establishes once and for all that work of comparable character requiring comparable skill must be compensated on a nondiscriminatory basis.

Unfortunately, today in the United States many women still work under the wage and opportunity handicaps. The time has come when we must banish all discrimination against workingwomen, and wipe out the longstanding pay differentials between men and women doing the same work.

I urge my colleagues to join me and the other supporters of this bill to make this a day to be remembered by all women. Let us leave this House today with the knowledge that we have wiped out a great social inequity.

Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge a favorable vote on H.R. 6060, which has become known as the equal pay for equal work bill.

There was a time when women were considered as mere chattels. Through education of man himself, however, the male specie has come to the realization that indeed the so-called fairer sex is his equal and in many respects his superior. For example, it has been scientifically shown that a woman can stand hotter and colder temperatures than a man can. It has been statistically shown too that women have a longer lifespan than men. And, not only are they "more prone to

motherhood than men," as so sagely observed by a member of the minority party, the gentleman from Illinois, in the committee report, but women are in fact the sole claimants to motherhood.

Through availing herself of advanced education and training, the American woman especially has advanced herself to a position of equality with members of her opposite sex in ability and performance. The great economic advancement which our Nation enjoys today is party due to the contributions made by women both in industry and research.

In recognition of this painful but nonetheless undeniable fact, proud men have taken measures through legislation and other means to improve the status of the working women over the years. There is, however, discrimination still being shown against women in the payment of wages and salaries for performing equal work with men. H.R. 6060 will not correct this inequity altogether but is definitely a step in the right direction.

It has become abundantly clear, especially from our experience in World War II, that one of our Nation's greatest resources is womanpower. If we are to maintain our leadership among the nations of the world in economics, science, industry, and social welfare, we must continue to utilize the talents and contributions of our female population. Presently there are 22,835,000 women gainfully employed. Of this number less than a million are in top administrative posts, according to Department of Labor statistics. With more and more women possessed of advanced education and training, they should account for a greater number in this category. In order to attract the best qualified women where they are most needed, it is imperative that the pay as well as the job be made attractive and challenging.

As a matter of simple justice, there is no longer an excuse for paying women less than men for performing the same work, if there ever was any. Women today are frequently pursuing professional and occupational careers as men are and are not infrequently breadwinners for their families. Women have long proven the importance of their role in our economy. They deserve equal pay for equal work. Let this body, consisting principally of men, vote "yes" on this important legislation today.

(Daily Congressional Record, 8701-8702, House, May 23, 1963.)

Mr. MCDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6060, a bill to prohibit discrimination on account of sex in the payment of wages by certain employers and to provide for the restitution of wages lost by employees by reason of such discrimination. I am particularly pleased to lend my support for H.R. 6060 since it is similar to a bill I introduced in the 87th Congress and my H.R. 6021 introduced on May 2, 1963.

The principle of equal pay, or payment of a rate based on the job performed, is fundamental to the American free enterprise system. Both employers and union leaders find its application important to the morale and efficiency of workers in their daily employment. It benefits the community by upholding the general level of wages and by maintaining purchasing power. In practice, it has proved workable and advantageous.