ED 053 358

TITLEINSTITUTION

PUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

AC 010 529

Women in 1970.Citizens Advisory Council on the Status of Women,Washington, D.C.Mar 7152p.Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 ($.40)

EDRS Price MF-$0.65 HC-$3.29*Discriminatory Attitudes (Social), *DiscriminatoryLegislation, *Equal Protection, *Females*United States Constitution

This document highlights the advances made by womenin 1970, e.g., the proclamation of Executive Order 11246, whichprohibits sex discrimination by federal contractors and became theinstrument for attacking such discrimination in the staffing ofuniversities. The council on female status emphasizes the importanceof the growing cooperation among organizations and individualsworking for equal rights for women. A memo is presented on theproposed equal rights amendment to the United States Constitution,which states that "Equality under the law shall not be denied orabridged by the United'States or by any State on account of sex."This memo spells out in detail many of the provisions of the proposedamendment and defends some major objections to these provisions. Thecouncil points out that in at least two areas, jury service andcriminal penalties, women appear to have made progress in 1970 ininvoking the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. (CK)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.EDUCATION & WELFAREOFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEH REPRO-DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN-IONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYREPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY W

CITIZENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS OF

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.EDUCATION & WELFAREOFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEH REPRO.DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYREPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY WOMEN in 1970

'ISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN

CITIZENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS

Honorable Jacqueline G. Gutwillig, ChairmanLt. Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.), Regional Volunteer

The National FoundationMarch of Dimes

Miss Virginia R. AllanExecutive Vice-PresidentCahalan Drug Stores, Inc.Member, Board of RegentsEastern Michigan University

Miss Nola A. AllenAttorney at Law

Dr. Margaret Long ArnoldHonorary PresidentGeneral Federation of Women's Clubs

Mrs. Diane G. BethelExecutive AssistantU.S. Citizens Committee for Free Cuba

Mrs. Lorraine L. BlairFinancial ConsultantPresidentLorraine Blair, Inc.Investments

Dr. Rita Ricardo CampbellSenior FellowHoover Institution

Cover design courtesy of:Mr. James Varner ParkerCurator of ArtThe Heard Museum of Anthropology-Primitive ArtPheonix, Arizona

Mrs. Julie Castcrman ConnorFolk Music Entertainer &

School Teacher

Miss Sarah Jane CunninghamAttorney at LawVice-President, International

Federation of Business &Professional Women's Clubs

Mrs. Mary Charles GriffinCivic Leader & Businesswoman

Miss Maxine R. HackeExecutiveWarren Petroleum Corp.

Mrs. Marie HamelVice PresidentHamel's Dairy & Ice Cream Co., Inc.

Mrs. Mary J. KyleEditor & PublisherTwin Cities CourierTelevision Editorial Commentator

Miss Margaret J. MealeyExecutive DirectorNational Council of Catholic Women

Mrs. Catherine EastExecutive Secretary

ENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN

Honorable Jacqueline G. Gutwillig, ChairmanLt. Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.), Regional Volunteer Advisor,

The National FoundationMarch of Dimes

a

-Primitive Art

Mrs. Julie Casterman ConnorFolk Music Entertainer &

School Teacher

Miss Sarah Jane CunninghamAttorney at LawVice-President, International

Federation of Business &Professional Women's Clubs

Mrs. Mary Charles GriffinCivic Leader & Businesswoman

Miss Maxine R. HackeExecutiveWarren Petroleum Corp.

Mrs. Marie HamelVice PresidentHamel's Dairy & Ice Cream Co., Inc.

Mrs. Mary J. KyleEditor & PublisherTwin Cities CourierTelevision Editorial Commentator

Miss Margaret J. MealeyExecutive DirectorNational Council of Catholic Women

Mrs. Catherine East

Miss Hazel PalmerAttorney at LawFormer President, National Federation

of Business & Professional Women'sClubs

Mrs. Sara H. RevercombCivic Leader & Former School

Teacher

Honorable Patricia SaikiMemberHawaii State Legislature

Miss Rachel E. ScottResearch Department, Department of

PediatricsJohns Hopkins University

Mrs. Yetta WassermanCivic Leader & Past PresidentCleveland Section, National Council

of Jewish Women

Mrs. Irene Wischer, PresidentPaladin Pipeline Co.Sr. Director & Executive OfficerPanhandle Producing Co.

Staff

Mrs. Bertha WhittakerExecutive Secretary Management Assistant

WOMEN IN 1970

CITIZENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS OF WOMENMarch 1971

For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing OfficeWashington, D.C. 20402 Price 40 cents

CITIZENS' ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN

Washington, D.C. 20210

The PresidentThe White HouseWashington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are honored to submit, herewith, our first report, the fifth for the Council. The Council has endeavored, in accordance withyour direction upon our appointment, "to contribute toward improving the status of women through proper use of the resourcesand activities of the Federal Government.. .." Specifically we have sought to provide leadership and to further the rising aspira-tions of women today to participate fully in American life.

Within the past months, the Council has forwarded to you and to the Interdepartment Committee on the Status of Womenrecommendations resulting from its studies. The Council concentrated its attention on subjects of most immediate concern:equal legal rights, maternity leave for employed women, equal employment opportunity, part-time employment, child develop-ment programs, and occupational counseling of young girls and of mature women seeking to return to the labor market.

The Council endorsed the equal rights amendment and published three papers on the subject.

The Council concluded with respect to maternity leave that absence from employment due to childbirth should be treated as atemporary disability. The Council recommended that Federal policy should be to advance sick leave for purposes of childbirthas is now done by the Federal Government for other temporary disabilities.

The Council also recommended greater enforcement authority for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and opposeddiscrimination by sex in retirement and pension plans.

The Council stressed the need for improving the quality of occupational counseling of young girls and advanced several ideas tomake easier the mature woman's return to the labor market. The need for a slow-down in population growth directly relates tothese counseling needs.

The first section of our report outlines the 1970 highlights of the women's movement nationally, and the second describes theCouncil's recommendations and other activities. We believe that the report has information relevant to your legislative programand is worthy of consideration by all leadership seeking to improve the status of women.

Your confidence in the Council, expressed when you met with its members in the White House at its first meeting, has been asource of strength and inspiration in its work to advance the cause of women. We appreciate the trust placed in us and the oppor-tunity to continue serving your Administration and to be of service to our country.

Respectfully,

JACQUELINE G. GUTWILLIGChairman

CONTENTS

Page

'70 Highlights

Recommendations and Activities 4

Equal Rights Amendment 4Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Enforcement Powers 4

Retirement and Pension Plans 4

Maternity Leave 4

Part-Time Work Opportunities 5

Statistical Data on Education 5

Child Development Centers 5

Occupational Counseling 5

Mature Women and the Labor Market 5

Public Service Activities 6

Acknowledgments 6

Appendix AA Memorandum on the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment tothe United States Constitution 9

Appendix BThe Equal Rights Amendment What It Will and Won't Do 17

Appendix CStatement on Bayh Substitute and Ervin Amendment to the EqualRights Amendment 19

Appendix DJob-Rclated Maternity Benefits 20

Appendix EReport of the Subcommittee on Counseling and Continuing Edu-cation 22

'70 HIGHLIGHTS *

The year 1970, the 50th anniversary of the women's suffrage amend-ment, was marked by a new solidarity among women and a greaterdetermination to achieve economic, legal, and social equality. Thenew spirit was symbolized by celebrations on August 26th by women'sgroups representing nationwide aspirations of women today. Thepositive and serious responses to women's demands from Government,universities, industry, churches, and the media resulted in definiteadvances.

Executive Order 11246, which prohibits sex discrimination by Federalcontractors, became the instrument for attacking such discriminationin staffing of universities. Complaints -on hiring practices of universitieswere filed with the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare asfast as data were gathered by local faculty and student organizations.At the close of the year several universities were under orders fromthe Department to adopt affirmative action programs designed toeliminate sex discrimination.

The Justice Department for the first time filed suit to give women equalemployment rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.The suit against Libbey-Owcns-Ford Co. and the United Glass andCeramic Workers was settled by a consent decree, requiring thatwomen have work opportunities in all departments and providing themwith redress for past illegal restrictions on such opportunities.

The Justice Department also asked the Supreme Court to accept forreview the case of Ida Phillips v. Martin Marietta Corporation, whichraised the question whether the refusal of an employer to considerthe employment of women with pre-school age children was in violationof Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Justice Departmentalso appeared for the plaintiff as amicus curiae.

The Labor Department won a landmark equal pay case in Shultz v.Wheaton Glass Company (421 F. 2d 259). The 3rd Circuit Court ofAppeals supported the Government's interpretation that jobs need onlybe substantially equal in order for the equal pay law to be applicable.

* The Council does not claim that these '70 highlights are the results of itsactivities alone; many forces, groups, and individuals working for manyyears are claimants to the progress achieved in 1970.

In fiscal year 1970 over $6equal pay law to nearly 1

women. The Department offerences on equal pay law awere attended by representorganizations, trade associatand the media.

The executive branch ofgressional bills H.R. 466 al'fringe benefits to husbands alcivilian and military, as atL:federally employed men.Federal employees a surviv,as widows of male employcjenacted into law. These bilfin that they reject the tradit:(as an adequate basis for proof modern families in whicThese bills are based on thefamilies is determined by tota "pin money" or luxury ea!

In the year 1970 also, therank of general. They arcArmy Nurse Corps; and 1:

elimination of legal restrictmilitary services has beenestablishment in 1963.

The Women's Bureau spoiattended by the most widerever assembled at such a conattending such a meeting,women from all minority gniThe conference adopted manment of the equal rights a,

ference, the White House 1.,.!

Force on Women's Rights dDepartment guidelines for el

*

Isary of the women's suffrage amend -idarity among women and a greaterpile, legal, and social equality. The,:brations on August 26th by women's

aspirations of women today. Thewomen's demands' from Government,and the media resulted in definite

1

ohibits sex discrimination by Federalnt for attacking such discriminationnits on hiring practices of universitiesf Health, Education, and Welfare as.al faculty and student organizations.universities were under orders from

-iative action programs designed to

rst time filed suit to give women equalII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.'ord Co. and the United Glass andy a consent decree, requiring that:1 all departments and providing themctions on such opportunities.

ed the Supreme Court to accept forMartin Marietta Corporation, whichrefusal of an employer to consider

re-school age children was in violation,,ct of 1964. The Justice Departmentamicus curiae.

andmark equal pay case in Shultz v.. 2d 259). The 3rd Circuit Court of

rot's interpretation that jobs need onlyr the equal pay law to be applicable.

these '70 highlights are the results of its,ups, and individuals working for many

achieved in 1970.

1

In fiscal year 1970 over $6 million was found due under the Federalequal pay law to nearly 18,000 employees, almost all of whom werewomen. The Department of Labor sponsored about 35 briefing con-ferences on equal pay law throughout the country. These conferenceswere attended by representatives of management, labor, women'sorganizations, trade associations, civic groups, the legal profession,and the media.

The executive branch of the Federal Government endorsed con-gressional bills H.R. 466 and H.R. 468, designed to give the samefringe benefits to husbands and children of federally employed women,civilian and military, as are received by the wives and children offederally employed men. H.R. 468, which gives widowers of femaleFederal employees a survivorship annuity under the same conditionsas widows of male employees, was incorporated in another bill andenacted into law. These bills have a more than personal significancein that they reject the traditional concept of family economic structureas an adequate basis for provision of benefits for the growing numberof modern families in which both husband and wife are employed.These bills are based on the reality that the standard of living in suchfamilies is determined by total income, and that the wife is more thana "pin money" or luxury earner.

In the year 1970 also, the President promoted three women to therank of general. They are Director, Women's Army Corps; Chief,Army Nurse Corps; and Director, Women in the Air Force. Theelimination of legal restrictions on advancement of women in themilitary services has been an objective of the Council since its

establishment in 1963.

The Women's Bureau sponsored a 50th Anniversary Conferenceattended by the most widely representative group of men and womenever assembled at such a conference. In addition to the persons typicallyattending such a meeting, young women were in attendance, alsowomen from all minority groups, union women, and women on welfare.The conference adopted many recommendations, among them endorse-ment of the equal rights amendment. In preparation for the con-ference, the White House released the report of the President's TaskForce on Women's Rights and Responsibilities and published LaborDepartment guidelines for enforcement of Executive Order 11246.

The formation of two new national organizations has testified to thegrowing solidarity among women. The Interstate Association of StateCommissions on the Status of Women will enable these commissionsto increase their effectiveness at home and to exercise a greaterinfluence on national policy. The National Conference of Women LawStudents provides a forum and a means of communication for youngwomen law students and shows promise to be a most effective moverwithin the establishment in bringing about equality of rights underthe law.

By far the most important development of the year was the concertedeffort of a wide spectrum of women's organizations to secure passageof the equal rights amendment. Some individual men, particularlylawyers and law professors, and also some mixed groups who formerlyopposed the equal rights amendment gave valuable support, afterrestudying the issues.

In February, the Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Womenendorsed the equal rights amendment, sensing that the time hadcome to advance the cause of justice and equality for men and women.A definitive legal paper on the subject was at this point publishedby the Council entitled "The Proposed Equal Rights Amendment tothe United States Constitution: A Memorandum" (Appendix A).

The Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Amendments held hearingson the equal rights amendment (S.J. Res. 61) on May 5th, 6th, and7th. The endorsement of the equal rights amendment by the Presi-dent's Task Force on Women's Rights and Responsibilities was madepublic in early June.

During the Women's Bureau Conference, also in June, CongresswomanMartha Griffiths filed a petition to discharge the Judiciary Committeeof the House of Representatives from further consideration of theamendment, as it had not received any consideration during theprevious 20 years. The discharge petition was successful, and onAugust 10 House Joint Resolution 264 was debated and passed bya vote of 350 to 15.

After 47 years of effort success seemed certain in the Senate sincethere were 81 sponsors of Senate Joint Resolution 61 and the hearings

2

1 1)

had been held in May. Oppin forcing further hearinrelection time when man,,Resolution 264 came befoiment No. 1049 was addedthe draft as well as an anthe public schools.

On October 14 a substitutewas grounded in the 14th

The Council prepared a p(Appendix C). It was conleft too many loopholes forconcluded further that anydraft would be self defeat;of equality under law could

Since the interested wometits adoption was not urgedSenate.

At the close of the year thand Republican parties an'corned with the equal rigliwork for successful passa,rights amendment, as won

It must be noted that so;active in advancing womcamendment.

The May and September h(mation about the status orof Documents, Governmen:

The "Equal Rights" AmtConsitutional AmenclmeiSenate, 91st Cong., 2d sc

Equal Rights 1970: Hc:U.S. Senate, 91st Cone.Price $1.75.

yanizations has testified to theinterstate Association of Statewill enable these commissionsc and to exercise a greateral Conference of Women Law

s of communication for youngto be a most effective mover

bout equality of rights under

of the year was the concerted)rganizations to secure passage

individual men, particularlylie mixed groups who formerlygave valuable support, after

uncil on the Status of Woment, sensing that the time hadd equality for men and women.ct was at this point published

Equal Rights Amendment tonorandum" (Appendix A).

anal Amendments held hearingses. 61) on May 5th, 6th, and

fights amendment by the Presi-and Responsibilities was made

.c, also in June, Congresswomancharge the Judiciary Committeem further consideration of the

any consideration during thectition was successful, and on64 was debated and passed by

-red certain in the Senate sinceResolution 61 and the hearings

had been held in May. Opponents of the measure, however, succeededin forcing further hearings,* helping to delay action until close toelection time when many Senators were campaigning. House JointResolution 264 came before the Scnatc in early October, and amend-ment No. 1049 was added to permit Congress to exclude women fromthe draft as well as an amcndmcnt No. 1048 relating to prayer inthe public schools.

On October 14 a substitute amendment No. 1062 was proposed whichwas grounded in the 14th amendment.

The Council prepared a paper analyzing the substitute amendment(Appendix C). It was concluded that the 14th amendment wordingleft too many loopholes for differences in treatment under law. It wasconcluded further that any wording which exempted women from thedraft would be self-defeating in that any exception to the principleof equality under law could be used to justify additional exceptions.

Since the interested women's groups did not endorse the substitute,its adoption was not urged, and no further action was taken by theSenate.

At the close of the year the leading women officials of the Democraticand Republican parties and other women's groups most actively con-cerned with the equal rights amendment were coordinating plans towork for successful passage during the 92d Congress of the equalrights amendment, as worded in House Joint Resolution 264.

It must be noted that some women's organizations and individualsactive in advancing women's status do not support the equal rightsamendment.

4- The May and September hearings are most valuable source books of infor-mation about the status of American women, available from Superintendentof Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402:

The "Equal Rights" Amendment: Hearings before the Subcommittee onConsitutional Amendments of the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S.Senate, 91st Cong., 2d sess. on S.J. Res. 61. Price $3.25.

Equal Rights 1970: Hearings before the Committee on the Judiciary,U.S. Senate, 91st Cong., 2d sess. on S.J. Res. 61 and S.J. Res. 231.Price $1.75.

In June and July numerous women leaders and Government officialstestified on

ondiscrimination at the hearings before the Special Sub-

committee n Education and Labor on section 805 of H.R. 16098.The report of the hearings will be a significant contribution to thegrowth of knowledge of the status of women in modcrn American life.*

Widespread interest in child development programs was evidenced athearings before subcommittees of both the House and the Senate oncomprehensive child care bills. The White House Conference onChildren voted as one of its overriding concerns "comprehensive,family oriented child development programs, including health service,day care and early childhood education."

Another encouraging development of the ,icar 1970 was the widenedinterest of business and industry in ending sex discrimination. Taskforces had been formed in several of the larger companies, and tradeassociations had included in their programs discussions of sex discrimi-nation. For example, a conference on women in industry was held atMary Baldwin College, sponsored by the college, American CanCompany, American Telephone and Telegraph Company, GeneralElectric Company, International Paper Company, and the Women'sBureau of the Department of Labor.

3

The most disturbing development of the pasthe Constitution of the United States and osmall number of women. Wc of the Colin(share the conviction that our society, for alifections, is the most flexible and is open toWc know that progress within our governor,by hard work and that only rights won witiarc lasting.

In concluding our remarks concerning thmembers of the Council reemphasize the i

cooperation among organizations and indcommon cause. Wc are learning that differ,to working together and indccd can contr.!ment. Many women are enjoying for the tiand satisfaction that conies from successwomen. If this trend continues, it could wsocial development of this decade.

* Discrimination Against Women: Hearings beton Education of the Committee on Educationsentatives, 91st Cong., 2d sess. orb section 805(Copies may be obtained by writing your Seri:

1;z

if Government officialscfore the Special Sub-

805 of H.R. 16098.nt contribution to thenodern American life.*

rams was evidenced atuse and the Senate on: louse Conference oncans "comprehensive,eluding health service,

1970 was the widenedx discrimination. Task

companies, and tradeussions of sex discrimi-in industry was held at°liege, American Canph Company, General.iny, and the Women's

The most disturbing development of the past year was the rejection ofthe Constitution of the United States and other legal institutions by asmall number of women. We of the Council and most other womenshare the conviction that our society, for all its weaknesses and imper-fections, is the most flexible and is open to change and advancement.We know that progress within our governmental structure can be wonby hard work and that only rights won within a representative systemare lasting.

In concluding our remarks concerning the highlights of 1970, themembers of the Council reemphasize the importance of the growingcooperation among organizations and individuals working for ourcommon cause. We are learning that differences in style are not barsto working together and indeed can contribute positively to achieve-ment. Many women are enjoying for the first time the mutual respectand satisfaction that comes from successful endeavors with otherwomen. If this trend continues, it could well be the most far reachingsocial development of this decade.

* Discrimination Against Women: Hearings before the Special Subcommitteeon Education of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Repre-sentatives, 91st Cong., 2d sess. oil section 805 of H.R. 16098. In two parts.(Copies may be obtained by writing your Senator or Congressman.)

RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTIVITIES

Equal Rights Amendment

The Council endorsed the equal rights amendment in February 1970upon recommendation of its subcommittee studying the legal status ofwomcn. The Council published a legal memorandum on thc amend-ment (Appcndix A), March 1970, and a second paper "The EqualRights AmendmentWhat It Will and Won't Do" (Appendix B),August 28, 1970. The latter was in response to many requests for ashorter paper, organized by the types of laws which would be affectedby the equal rights amendment.

The Council released a statement on October 29, 1970, regarding thesubstitute amendment based on the 14th amendment and the amend-ment to permit exclusion of women from the draft (Appendix C).

Demands on Council members to speak, give interviews, and sendinformational materials on the subject of the equal rights amendmenthave bcen numerous throughout the year.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Enforcement Powers

The Council found that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 hasbeen a valuable ally in promoting equal opportunity for women inemployment. The lack of adequate enforcement authority for the EqualEmployment Opportunity Commission, however, means that the mainburden of enforcement falls on the individual complainant. If concilia-tion efforts of the Commission fail, as they have in over half the casesin which the Commission has found that discrimination occurred, theindividual must pursue redress in the courts. Greater enforcementauthority would result in greater cooperation by employers and unionsduring the conciliation stages of a complaint. The Council, therefore,recommended greater enforcement authority for the Commission.

Retirement and Pension Plans

The Council opposed any legislation permitting discrimination on thebasis of sex in retirement and pension plans.

Maternity Leave

The Interdepartmental CommittLthe Council to consider the pal(eluded in a report titled "Repo'.Benefits" (for Federal employe.cct group assigned to study enreport and Federal policies and

A statement of principle was ad1970, and reads as follows:

Childbirth and complicatiorelated purposes, temporaryas such undcr any healthinsurance, or sick leave pfraternal society. Any polior union, writtcn or uiitemporary disability other t.to incapacity duc to prepolicies or practiccs relatinor recall to duty, and scnio

No additional or differentapplied to disability bccausno pregnant woman empluin relation to job-relatedemployee similarly situate,

Also thc Council madc thc folioregarding maternity leave for FL.Secretary of Labor:

While agreeing that thenprotection for Federal e.particularly thosc with sa proposed special benchRecommends that sick I

childbirth or complicati(conditions as it wouldporary

ACTIVITIES

endment in February 1970studying thc legal status of

emorandum on the amend-second paper "The Equal

Von't Do" (Appendix B),Ilse to many requests for avs which would be affected

ber 29, 1970, regarding theamendment and the amend-

draft (Appendix C).

. give interviews, and sendthe equal rights amendment

ssion Enforcement Powers

'ivil Rights Act of 1964 hasopportunity for women in

ment authority for the Equalowever, means that the mainual complainant. If concilia-v have in over half the casesdiscrimination occurred, the

.:ourts. Greater enforcemention by employers and unionsaint. The Council, therefore,,rity for the Commission.

miffing discrimination on theans.

4

Maternity Leave

The Interdepartmental Committee on the Status of Women requestedthe Council to consider the paid maternity leave recommendation in-cluded in a report titled "Report of thc Subcommittee on MaternityBenefits" (for Federal employees), dated November 1969. The proj-ect group assigned to study employment for women examined thereport and Federal policies and proposals.

A statement of principle was adopted by the Council on October 29,1970, and reads as follows:

Childbirth and complications of prcgnancy are, for all job-related purposes, temporary disabilities and should be treatedas such under any health insurance, temporary disabilityinsurance, or sick leave plan of an employer, union, orfraternal society. Any policies or practices of an employeror union, written or unwritten, applied to instances oftemporary disability other than pregnancy should be appliedto incapacity due to pregnancy or childbirth, includingpolicies or practices relating to leave of absence, restorationor recall to duty, and seniority.

No additional or different benefits or restrictions should beapplied to disability because of pregnancy or childbirth, andno pregnant woman employee should be in a better positionin relation to job-related practices or benefits than anemployee similarly situated suffering from other disability.

Also the Council made the following comments and recommendationsregarding maternity leave for Federal employees directly to the UnderSecretary of Labor:

While agreeing that there was a need for additional incomeprotection for Federal employees, both men and women,particularly those with short service, the Council opposesa proposed special bcnefit system for maternity leave only.

Recommends that sick leave be advanced for purposcs ofchildbirth or complications of prcgnancy under the sameconditions as it would be advanced for any other tem-porary disability.

Recommends withdrawal of the Federal Personnel Manualguidelines for maternity leave.

The Council was requested, additionally, from the private sector forpolicy recommendations concerning maternity leave for employedwomen. The review was then broadened to include private employmentpractices and a public paper, including the Statement of Principle, waspublished by the Council, setting forth the factors leading to theCouncil's conclusions (Appendix D).

Part-Time Work Opportunities

The Council recommended to the Civil Service Commission that asurvey be made of the Federal organizations using part-time employeeswith a view to publishing descriptions of the methods used and eval-uating the results of such programs.

Part-time employment can be an advantage to management. It is ameans of utilizing women with professional and managerial skills inshort supply whose family responsibilities preclude full-time employ-ment. The Council also noted that retired men and women withvaluable skills and full-time students would also benefit from morepart-time work opportunities.

The Council believed that making employers more aware of themethods being used and the advantages of existing programs wouldstimulate the growth of part-time employment, providing neededemployees to industry and a means of service for many men andwomen who otherwise could not contribute to society.

Statistical Data on Education

The Council recommended that the Office of Education collect, tabu-late, and publish by sex all data relating to persons. The Higher Educa-tion General Information Survey (HEGIS) should collect and publishdata on teaching personnel in higher education by sex so thatthe facts as to the differences in numbers, rank, and salaries betweenmen and women engaged in professional positions in higher educationare known.

Child Development Centers

The Council's project group studying day care recoilCouncil that volunteer agencies be made more aware (be encouraged to further promote day care programs.use of existing facilities, such as church and school bu

The development of high quality child developmentgreat concern to the Government as well as private orindividuals. The Council will continue its concern foeducational programs and facilities.

Occupational Counseling

The Council recommended that the Office of Educatiment of Labor, and concerned professional groups shoquality and quantity of occupational counseling avLTradition and the mass media depress girls' aspirationsinto a limited number of low-paying occupations. Mutional counseling which girls and women receive isobsolete. It fails to recognize the importance of three(1) the multiple roles of women in modern societymarried women work), (2) the emergence of broadhorizons for women, and (3) the strategic value towell as to a young boy of long-rangc planning andjob futures consistent with individual abilities and intoto control population and the current surplus ofsecondary school teachers are among the factors 1.1

urgency to the need for better counseling now.

The Council also noted a need for broadening thedisadvantaged child, both urban and rural, beyondenvironment so that he is aware that there are manein today's economy about which his parents and immtmay know little.

Appendix E lists ten specific recommendations on cou'

Mature Women and the Labor Market

The Council at its February and June meetings end°mcnt of local and national groups to establish a n(

the Federal Personnel Manualye.

ionally, from the private sector forng maternity leave for employed

iened to include private employmentding the Statement of Principle, was

forth the factors leading to the)

Civil Service Commission that ainizations using part-time employeesions of the methods used and eval-

advantage to management. It is aofessional and managerial skills insibilities preclude full-time employ-hat retired men and women withants would also benefit from more

ng employers more aware of thentages of existing programs wouldis employment, providing neededans of service for many men andontributc to society.

c Office of Education collect, tabu-ating to persons. The Higher Educa-REGIS) should collect and publishhigher education by sex so thatumbers, rank, and salaries between

ssional positions in higher education

5

16

Child Development Centers

The Council's project group studying day care recommended to theCouncil that volunteer agencies be made more aware of this need andbe encouraged to further promote day care programs, making greateruse of existing facilities, such as church and school buildings.

The development of high quality child development programs is ofgreat concern to the Government as well as private organizations andindividuals. The Council will continue its concern for these needededucational programs and facilities.

Occupational Counseling

The Council recommended that the Office of Education, the Depart-ment of Labor, and concerned professional groups should improve thequality and quantity of occupational counseling available to girls.Tradition and the mass media depress girls' aspirations and steer theminto a limited number of low-paying occupations. Much of the voca-tional counseling which girls and women receive is inadequate andobsolete. It fails to recognize the importance of three major factors:(1) the multiple roles of women in modern society (40 percent ofmarried women work), (2) the emergence of broader employmenthorizons for women, and (3) the strategic value to a young girl aswell as to a young boy of long-range planning and preparation forjob futures consistent with individual abilities and interests. The needto control population and the current surplus of elementary andsecondary school teachers are among the factors that give addedurgency to the need for better counseling now.

The Council also noted a need for broadening the horizon of thedisadvantaged child, both urban and rural, beyond his immediateenvironment so that he is aware that there are many types of workin today's economy about which his parents and immediate associatesmay know little.

Appendix E lists ten specific recommendations on counseling.

Mature Women and the Labor Market

The Council at its February and June meetings endorsed encourage-ment of local and national groups to establish a nongovernmental,

1 '7

three-point program, aimed at three different educational levels attainedby women:

For women with grade school education or less, establish-ment of programs to combat illiteracy. An example is theexcellent work being done by the public libraries in theinner core city area of Cleveland.

For women who are high school graduates, establishmentof college consortia, especially involving junior or com-munity colleges, which offer one or two year coursesleading to a given occupation, as for example, X-raytechnician and library assistant. The proposal emphasizescommunity college involvement, as they are geographicallymore widespread than universities, and a consortium ap-proach so that the greatest variety of courses as possiblemay be offered.

For women who have attended college, encouragement ofone-day workshops describing the available alternatives invocational and volunteer activities in a given geographicalarca. An example is the "Second Careers for Women"workshop held at Stanford University, May 2, 1970. Sevenhundred women attended and 90 volunteer panelistsparticipated.

Public Service Activities

Council members have responded generously to the many requests bypress, TV, and radio for speeches, lectures, and interviews on "statusof women." Members have also served on panels and committeesconcerned with women's status.

Council members have addressed men's and women's local service,political, and religious clubs and State conventions of such groups,chambers of commerce, university conferences and faculty groups,State and city status of women commissions, bar associations, FederalGovernment executives, high school assemblies, oil industry executives,and State and local chapters of the League of Women Voters, NationalFederation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, GeneralFederation of Women's Clubs, American Association of University

6

Women, National Assnthe Junior League. Atmembers have testifiedBureau conferences, ti

Conference of Career \\Federation of BusinesAssociation of Allied

Filling requests from itbulk requests for paperthe Presidential Taskhas taken up much of t

Approximately 25,000equal rights amcndmethe paper "The EqualDo"; and 20,000 copi

In addition, the staffand other media rcpretions on the status ofearlier publications olvarious subjects collectMany of the request,reproduction of matcri

Acknowledgments

The Council is especiament and support give'members of the ExecuThe Council also grateto its projects and theofficials and dcpartmJustice; Commerce; DEqual Employment 0Commission. Their acbeen of immeasurabletions and resultant dcc

Special appreciationfrom Honorable Patric

nt educational levels attained

cation or less, establish-'racy. An example is thee public libraries in the

graduates, establishmentnvolving junior or com-e or two year coursesas for example, X-rayhe proposal emphasizes

s they are geographicallys, and a consortium ap-ty of courses as possible

°liege, encouragement ofc available alternatives ins in a given geographicalId Careers for Women"rsity, May 2, 1970. Seven

90 volunteer panelists

ously to the many requests byres, and interviews on "status'd on panels and committees

s and women's local service,conventions of such groups,

nferences and faculty groups,sions, bar associations, Federal'mblies, oil industry executives,lue of Women Voters, Nationalanal Women's Clubs, Generalcan Association of University

6

Women, National Association of Women Deans and Counselors, andthe Junior League. At the national level, the Council Chairman andmembers have testified at congressional hearings, spoken at Women'sBureau conferences, the Republican Women's National meeting, aConference of Career Women Leaders, the Conventions of the NationalFederation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Women'sAssociation of Allied Beverage Industries, and Women Pharmacists.

Filling requests from the public and the Congress for individual andbulk requests for papers published by the Council and for the report ofthe Presidential Task Force on Women's Rights and Responsibilitieshas taken up much of the time of the Council's small staff.

Approximately 25,000 copies of the Council's memorandum on theequal rights amendment have been distributed; 10,000 copies ofthe paper "The Equal Rights AmendmentWhat It Will and Won'tDo"; and 20,000 copies of "A Matter of Simple Justice."

In addition, the staff has filled more than 100 requests from the pressand other media representatives for general information and publica-tions on the status of women. There have been countless requests forearlier publications of the Council and for published materials onvarious subjects collected by the Council staff over a period of years.Many of the requests requiring personal answer or selection andreproduction of materials could not be met by the limited staff.

Acknowledgments

The Council is especially indebted to the President for the encourage-ment and support given the Council and for the help given by the staffmembers of the Executive Office and the Office of the Vice President.The Council also gratefully acknowledges the significant contributionsto its projects and the fine cooperation enjoyed from other Governmentofficials and departmentsespecially the Departments of Labor;Justice; Commerce; Defense; and Health, Education, and Welfare; theEqual Employment Opportunity Commission; and the Civil ServiceCommission. Their advice, experience, and technical assistance hasbeen of immeasurable benefit to the Council members in their delibera-tions and resultant decisions.

Special appreciation is given for the advice and assistance receivedfrom Honorable Patricia Hitt, Assistant Secretary of Health, Education,

and Wclfare; Honorablc Elizabcth Duncan Koontz, Director of theWomen's Bureau, Dcpartmcnt of Labor; and Dr. Jcan Spencer, SpccialAssistant to the Vice Prcsidcnt. Miss Mary Eastwood of the Depart-ment of Justice and Miss Jcan Wclls, Mrs. Isabelle Streidl, and Mr.Arthur Bcsncr of the Women's Burcau, Dcpartmcnt of Labor, gavevaluablc technical assistancc to our project groups in drafting workpapers and furnishing information.

To all thc guests who appcarcd before the Council, we take thisopportunity to thank them publicly:

Miss Lucy De Carlo, Chicf of thc State and CommunityGrant Program, Equal Employment Opportunity Com-mission

Dr. Lincoln H. Day, Associate Professor of Public Health andSociology, Yale University (now with Statistical Office,

United Nations)Miss Anne Draper, Research Associate, AFL-CIOMiss Betsy Erb, Assistant to Deputy Assistant Secretary

of Health, Education, and WelfareMiss Melany Gibson, Federal Extension Service, Charles

County, MarylandMrs. Vera Glaser, Correspondent, Knight NewspapersHonorable Martha W. Griffiths, U.S. House of Representa-

tivesHonorable Patricia Hitt, Assistant Secretary of Health,

Education, and WclfareMr. James Hunt, Aetna Insurance and Casualty CompanyMiss Patricia King, Spccial Assistant to Chairman, Equal

Employmcnt Opportunity CommissionHonorablc Elizabeth Duncan Koontz, Director, Women's

Burcau, Department of LaborHonorable Elizabcth Kuck, Commissioner, Equal Employ-

ment Opportunity Commission (now with InternationalHarvester)

Mrs. Therese W. Lansburgh, President, Day Care and ChildDevelopmcnt Council of America, Inc.

7

Mrs. Martha L. Mason, Fulcra' ExtensCounty, Maryland

Dr. Ruth Oltman, Staff Associatc, Highican Association of Univcrsity Worm

Dr. Ruth Osborn, Dircctor, ContintWomen, Gcorgc Washington Univers

Mr. Robert E. Patricclli, Deputy UnderCoordination, Dcpartmcnt of HcalWclfare

Mr. William W. Scott, Attorncy at La \Rill, and Edwards

Honorablc George P. Shultz, SccrctaDirector, Office of Management and 1

Honorable Laurence H. Silberman, Und,Miss Alice M. Stewart, Fcdcral Exten,

ment of AgricultureMr. Jule Sugarman, Children's Bure

Health, Education, and Welfare (

York City Human Rcsourccs AdmiiiMr. Timothy Wirth, Deputy Assistant

Education, and Welfare

Members of the youth pancl were:Miss Margarct Cooper, Gc\orge WashingMiss Robin Landi, Wcstcrn High SchotMiss Nora Pfcnig, Univcrsity of MarylaMr. David Nadler, Gcorgc Washington

Members of the maternity [cave pancl were:Mr. Jack De Sipio, Civil Scrvicc ComnMr. Robert Hobson, Officc of Fcdcral (

Departmcnt of LaborMr. Morton Horwitz, Civil Scrvicc CornMiss Judith Jenkins, Officc of Fcdcral (

Departmcnt of LaborMrs. Evangcline Swift, Equal Empi4

Commission

2.1

uncan Koontz, Director of ther; and Dr. Jcan Spencer, SpecialMary Eastwood of the Depart-Mrs. Isabelle Strcidl, and Mr.

Department of Labor, gaveroject groups in drafting work

ore the Council, we take this

the State and Communityvment Opportunity Com-

fessor of Public Health andow with Statistical Office,

ociate, AFL-CIOeputy Assistant Secretaryfa re

,xtension Service, Charles

Knight NewspapersJ.S. House of Rcpresenta-

ant Secretary of Health,

and Casualty Companyistant to Chairman, Equalmissionoontz, Director, Women's

imissioner, Equal Employ-(now with International

sident, Day Care and Childrica, Inc.

Mrs. Martha L. Mason, Federal Extension Service, CharlesCounty, Maryland

Dr. Ruth Oltman, Staff Associate, Higher Education, Amer-ican Association of University Women

Dr. Ruth Osborn, Dircctor, Continuing Education forWomen, Gcorgc Washington University

Mr. Robert E. Patricelli, Dcputy Undcr Secretary for PolicyCoordination, Department of Health, Education, andWelfare

Mr. William W. Scott, Attorney at Law, Collier, Shannon,Rill, and Edwards

Honorable George P. Shultz, Secretary of Labor (nowDircctor, Office of Management and Budget)

Honorable Laurence H. Silberman, Under Secretary of LaborMiss Alice M. Stewart, Federal Extension Service, Depart-

ment of AgricultureMr. Jule Sugarman, Children's Bureau, Department of

Health, Education, and Welfare (now Director, NewYork City Human Resources Administration)

Mr. Timothy Wirth, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Health,Education, and Welfare

Members of the youth panel were:Miss Margaret Cooper, George Washington UniversityMiss Robin Landi, Western High SchoolMiss Nora Pfenig, University of MarylandMr. David Nadler, George Washington University

Members of the maternity leave panel were:Mr. Jack De Sipio, Civil Service CommissionMr. Robert Hobson, Office of Federal Contract Compliance,

Department of LaborMr. Morton Horwitz, Civil Service CommissionMiss Judith Jenkins, Office of Federal Contract Compliance,

Departmcnt of LaborMrs. Evangeline Swift, Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission

Appendix A

A MEMORANDUM ONTHE PROPOSED EQUAL RIGHTS AMENI

TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUMarch 1970

The proposed equal rights amendment to the U.S. Constitution would United State;provide that "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or departmentalabridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex," and President to tiwould authorize the Congress and the States to enforce the amend- Equal Rightment by appropriate legislation.' States.

The purpose of the proposed amendment would be to provide con-stitutional protection against laws and official practices that treat menand women differently. At the present time, the extent to whichwomen may invoke the protection of the Constitution against lawswhich discriminate on the basis of sex is unclear. The equal rightsamendment would insure equal rights under the law for men andwomen and would secure the right of all persons to equal treatmentunder the laws and official practices without differentiation based onsex.

Joint resolutions proposing that the equal rights amendment beapproved for submission to the States for ratification have beensponsored by 75 Senators and 225 Members of the House of Repre-sentatives in this (91st) Congress (as of March 11, 1970). Adoptionof the amendment would require a 2/3 vote of both Houses of Congressand ratification by 3/4 of the States. Thus there are already more thanthe necessary number of Senators who are committed to support theamendment for its approval by the Senate. These joint resolutions arecurrently pending in the respective Senate and House JudiciaryCommittees.The Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women, at its meetingFebruary 7, 1970, endorsed the equal rights amendment, adopting thefollowing resolution:

The Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Womenendorses the proposed Equal Rights Amendment to thi

See, e.g., S.J. Res. 61, 91st Cong., 1st Sess.

The Council's rel.:February 13, 1971

Hisj

Resolutions propsduced in every Coand Senate JudiciThe amendment hJudiciary CommittCong., 2d Sess.).

Both times it waswhich provided ttstrucd to impair 'Jconferred by law.rider accomplishcsince, as the Scrimcation is not acctlaw. It is under thhave been treatsavailable to men.',

'Hearings on thesion on the Leg: ISubcommittee No.Senate Committeements, 84th Cong.,

"See 96 Cong. Rec.

Appendix A

A MEMORANDUM ONTHE PROPOSED EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENTS

TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONMarch 1970

nt to the U.S. Constitution woulder the law shall not be denied orany State on account of sex," andhe States to enforce the amend-

(fluent would be to provide con-( official practices that treat men'sent time, the extent to whichof the Constitution against lawssex is unclear. The equal rightsfits under the law for men and)f all persons to equal treatmentwithout differentiation based on

he equal rights amendment betates for ratification have been'vlembers of the House of Repre-ss of March 11, 1970). Adoption

vote of both Houses of Congressrhus there are already more thanho are committed to support the

senate. These joint resolutions areye Senate and House Judiciary

le Status of Women, at its meetingI rights amendment, adopting the

l on the Status of WomenRights Amendment to the

:,ess.

United States Constitution and recommends that the Inter-departmental Committee on the Status of Women urge thePresident to immediately request the passage of the proposedEqual Rights Amendment by the Congress of the UnitedStates.

The Council's recommendation was transmitted to the President onFebruary 13, 1970.

History of the Equal Rights Amendment

Resolutions proposing an equal rights amendment have been intro-duced in every Congress since 1923. Hearings were held by the Houseand Senate Judiciary Committees in 1948 and 1956, respectively.2The amendment has been repeatedly reported favorably by the SenateJudiciary Committee, most recently in 1964 (S. Rept. No. 1558, 88thCong., 2d Sess.), and has twice passed the Senate, in 1950 and 1953.

Both times it was passed, however, with the so-called "Hayden rider,"which provided that the equal rights amendment "shall not be con-strued to impair any rights, benefits, or exemptions now or hereafterconferred by law, upon persons of the female sex." " Both times therider accomplished its purpose of killing the proposed amendmentsince, as the Senate Judiciary Committee has noted, the rider's "qualifi-cation is not acceptable to women who want equal rights under thelaw. It is under the guise of so-called 'rights' or 'benefits' that womenhave been treated unequally and denied opportunities which areavailable to men." (S. Rept. No. 1558, supra)

Hearings on the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution and Commis-sion on the Legal Status of Women, House Committee on the Judiciary,Subcommittee No. 1, 80th Cong., 2d Sess. (1948); Hearings on Equal Rights,Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Constitutional Amend-ments, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. (1956).

'See 96 Cong. Rec. 872-3 (1950); 99 Cong. Rec. 8954-5 (1953).

Since the proposed equal rights amendment has failed to pass Congressfor the past 47 years, it may appear to be a "loser," although admittedlyit took women more than 50 years to secure the adoption of the 19thamendment. However, a revival of the feminist movement has occurredduring the past four years and it is greatly increasing in momentum,especially among younger women. Thus the demand for equal rightsand support for the amendment is becoming more widespread, with acorresponding increase in likelihood of early adoption of theamendment.

Laws Which Discriminate on the Basis of Sex

A number of studies have been made in recent years by the President'sCommission on the Status of Women, the Citizens' Advisory Councilon the Status of Women, and State commissions on the status ofwomen concerning the various types of laws which distinguish on thebasis of sex.' Opposition to the equal rights amendment in the pasthas been based in part on "fear of the unknown," i.e., lack of informa-tion concerning the types of laws which distinguish on the basis of sexand would therefore be affected by the amendment. Further delay inapproving the amendment thus need not await any further study of thekinds of laws that discriminate on the basis of sex.

These studies have shown that numerous distinctions based on sex stillexist in the law. For example:

1. State laws placing special restrictions on women with respectto hours of work and weightlifting on the job;

2. State laws prohibiting women from working in certainoccupations;

3. Laws or practices operating to exclude women from Statecolleges and universities (including higher standards requiredfor women applicants to institutions of higher learning andin the administration of scholarship programs);

I See especially, Report of the Committee on Civil and Political Rights, Presi-dent's Commission on the Status of Women (GPO, 1963); Report of the TaskForce on Labor Standards, Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women(GPO, 1963); Report of the Task Force on Family Law and Policy, CACSW(GPO, 1968). See also, Kanowitz, Women and the Law: The UnfinishedRevolution, U. of N.M. Press, 1969.

10

4. Discrimination in employments;

5. Dual pay schedules forteachers;

6. State laws providing for atain circumstances, to ex

7. State laws placing specia!of married women or ordomicile;

8. State laws that require mato go through a formal prbefore they may engage in

9. Social Security and othc .give greater benefits to on

10. Discriminatory preferenct.cases;

11. State laws providing thatof the minor children;"

12. Different ages for males a(b) age for marriage, f,support, and (d) juvenile

13. Exclusion of women fro':Selective Service Act of i

14. Special sex-based exempt'juries;

15. Heavier criminal penalti.male offenders committin

Although it is possible that these anttually be corrected by legislation, lcsubstitutes for fundamental constituttion. Any class of persons (i.e.,invoke the protection of the Consti

`See, e.g., Calif. Code Civ. Proc., §§124.050.

"See, e.g., Code of Ga. Annot., §§ 49-1§ 5.

(intent has failed to pass Congressbe a "loser," although admittedly

ci secure the adoption of the 19thc feminist movement has occurredgreatly increasing in momentum,hus the demand for equal rights

ecoming more widespread, with aod of early adoption of the

e on the Basis of Sex

in recent years by the President'sn, the Citizens' Advisory Councilto commissions on the status of; of laws which distinguish on theual rights amendment in the pastto unknown," i.e., lack of informa-Uch distinguish on the basis of sexthe amendment. Further delay innot await any further study of the

c basis of sex.

Tous distinctions based on sex still

restrictions on women with respectghtlifting on the job;vomen from working in certain

ring to exclude women from Stateincluding higher standards requiredinstitutions of higher learning and

cholarship programs);

lee on Civil and Political Rights, Presi-omen (GPO. 1963); Report of the Taskdvisory Council on the Status of Womenrre on Family Law and Policy, CACSWWomen and the Law: The Unfinished

10

4. Discrimination in employment by State and local govern-ments;

5. Dual pay schedules for men and women public schoolteachers;

6. State laws providing for alimony to be awarded, under cer-tain circumstances, to ex-wives but not to ex-husbands;

7. State laws placing special restrictions on the legal capacityof married women or on their right to establish a legaldomicile;

8. State laws that require married women but not married mento go through a formal procedure and obtain court approvalbefore they may engage in an independent business;

9. Social Security and other social benefits legislation whichgive greater benefits to one sex than to the other;

10. Discriminatory preferences, based on sex, in child custodycases;

11. State laws providing that the father is the natural guardianof the minor children;5

12. Different ages for males and females in (a) child labor laws,(b) age for marriage, (c) cutoff of the right to parentalsupport, and (d) juvenile court jurisdiction;

13. Exclusion of women from the requirements of the MilitarySelective Service Act of 1967;

14. Special sex-based exemptions for women in selection of Statejuries;

15. Heavier criminal penalties for female offenders than formale offenders committing the same crime.

Although it is possible that these and other discriminations might even-tually be corrected by legislation, legislative remedies are not adequatesubstitutes for fundamental constitutional protection against discrimina-tion. Any class of persons (i.e., women) which cannot successfullyinvoke the protection of the Constitution against discriminatory treat-

`See, e.g., Calif. Codo Civ. Proc., §§ 1811-1819; Nev. Rev. Stats., §§ 124.010-124.050.

"See, e.g., Code of Ga. Annot., §§ 49-102--49-104; Okla. Stats. Annot., tit. 10,§ 5.

2

ment is by definition comprised of "second class citizens" and is inferiorin the eyes of the law.

The Position of Women Under ExistingConstitutional Provisions

The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that noState shall "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without dueprocess of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equalprotection of the laws." The Federal government is similarly restrictedfrom interfering with these individual rights, under the "due processclause" of the Fifth Amendment.

During the past century, women have been largely unsuccessful in seek-ing judicial relief from sex discrimination in cases challenging theconstitutionality of discriminatory laws under these provisions. As theCommittee on Civil and Political Rights, President's Commission onthe Status of Women, noted in its 1963 Report:

In no 14th amendment case alleging discrimination onaccount of sex has the United States Supreme Court heldthat a law classifying persons on the basis of sex is unrea-sonable and therefore unconstitutional.'

In 1874, the Supreme Court held that the privileges and immunities ofcitizens of the United States, protected from abridgment by the Statesunder the Fourteenth Amendment, did not confer upon women theright to vote, although the Court conceded that women were personsand citizens within the meaning of the amendment.8 Similarly, theprivileges and immunities clause was held not to confer on womenthe right to practice law.°

The constitutionality of State laws regulating the employment of women(but not men) was upheld in a number of cases brought between1908 and 1937: maximum hours laws," laws prohibiting night work

'GPO, 1963, p. 34."Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 168." Bradwell v. State, 16 Wall. 130 (1872); In re Lockwood, 154 U.S. 116 (1894).

10 Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1908); Riley v. Massachusetts, 232 U.S. 671(1914); Miller v. Wilson, 236 U.S. 373 (1915); Bus ley v. McLaughlin, 236 U.S.385 (1915).

11

for women," and laws requiring1948, the Court upheld a Micinexceptions) the licensing of womc

A Florida law providing that woiunless she registers with the clerknot violative of the Fourteenth Amrecently, a three-judge Federal cotexcluding women from jury servietthe Fourteenth Amendment, statin

The Constitution of the Uiembodying general principlethe institutions of governmcnIt is therefore this Court's foilas a living document to the 1,

.contemporary society.

* * *

. . . The Alabama statute tiserve on juries . . . violates tiAmendment to the Constituforbids any state to "deny tothe equal protection of theconstitutional provision is tc

before the law. This meancitizensincluding women.401, 408 (M.D. Ala., l960

In Abbot v. Mines, 411 F. 2d 35a case in which the trial judge 11;panel because the evidence in tiltcancer of the male genitals. The

Radice v. New York, 264 U.S. 292"West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 3(

Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. 5251" Goesaert v. Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 (1"Hoyt v. Florida, 368 U.S. 57 (196

of "second class citizens" and is inferior

Women Under Existingtional Provisions

) the U.S. Constitution provides that noof life, liberty, or property, without dueperson within its jurisdiction the equal

deral government is similarly restrictediividual rights, under the "due processnt.

n have been largely unsuccessful in seek-iscrimination in cases challenging the

ory laws under these provisions. As theical Rights, President's Commission on

its 1963 Report:

case alleging discrimination on'tilted States Supreme Court heldsons on the basis of sex is unrea-.onstitutiona1.7

eld that the privileges and immunities of)rotected from abridgment by the Statesinent, did not confer upon women theurt conceded that women were personsmg of the amendment.8 Similarly, theuse was held not to confer on women

aws regulating the employment of womenn a number of cases brought between

ours laws," laws prohibiting night work

62, 168.1872); In re Lockwood, 154 U.S. 116 (1894).(1908); Riley v. Massachusetts, 232 U.S. 671

S. 373 (1915); Beaky v. McLaughlin, 236 U.S.

11

for women," and laws requiring a minimum wage for women.'2 In1948, the Court upheld a Michigan law prohibiting (with certainexceptions) the licensing of women as bartenders."

A Florida law providing that women not be called for jury serviceunless she registers with the clerk of court her desire to serve was heldnot violative of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1961.1 However, morerecently, a three-judge Federal court in Alabama held that State's lawexcluding women from jury service violated the rights of women underthe Fourteenth Amendment, stating:

The Constitution of the United States must be read asembodying general principles meant to govern society andthe institutions of government as they evolve through time.It is therefore this Court's function to apply the Constitutionas a living document to the legal cases and controversies ofcontemporary society.

. . . The Alabama statute that denies women the right toserve on juries . . . violates that provision of the FourteenthAmendment to the Constitution of the United States thatforbids any state to "deny to any person within its jurisdictionthe equal protection of the laws." The plain effect of thisconstitutional provision is to prohibit prejudicial disparitiesbefore the law. This means prejudicial disparities for allcitizensincluding women. White v. Crook, 251 F. Supp.401, 408 (M.D. Ala., 1966).

In Abbot v. Mines, 411 F. 2d 353 (C.A. 6, 1969) the Court reverseda case in which the trial judge had dismissed women jurors from thepanel because the evidence in the case required testimony concerningcancer of the male genitals. The Court of Appeals stated:

"Radice v. New York, 264 U.S. 292 (1924)."West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, 300 U.S. 379 (1937), overruling Adkins v.

Children's Hospital, 261 U.S. 525 (1923)."` Goesaert v. Cleary, 335 U.S. 464 (1948)."Hoyt v. Florida, 368 U.S. 57 (1961).

It is common knowledge that society no longer coddleswomen from the very real and sometimes brutal facts oflife. Women moreover, do not seek such oblivion. . . .

The District Judge's desire to avoid embarrassment to thewomen jurors is understandable and commendable but suchsentiments must be subordinated to constitutional mandates.411 F. 2d at 355.

As recently as ten years ago, the Supreme Court declined to hear acase in which the Texas Court of Civil Appeals had upheld the exclu-sion of women from a State college, Texas A. & M.'"

In February 1970 a three-judge Federal court dismissed as "moot" aclass action in which women sought to desegregate various all maleand all female public institutions of higher learning in the State ofVirginia. However, the Court had previously ordered the Universityto consider without regard to sex the women plaintiffs' applications foradmission to the University of Virginia at Charlottesville and to sub-mit a three-year plan for desegregating the University at Charlottes-ville. Kirstein et al v. The Rector and Visitors of the University ofVirginia, etc., et al. (E.D. Va., Richmond Div. Civil No. 220-69R).

Although there are very few female criminals as compared to malecriminals, some laws provide for longer prison terms for women thanmen committing the same crime. Such laws in Pennsylvania and Con-necticut have been held to be inconsistent with the equal protectionguarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment."

Thus, in at least two areasjury service and criminal penaltieswomen appear to have made progress in invoking the protection ofthe Fourteenth Amendment. Although jury service is important as apractical matter it is hardly central to the lives of women. Criminalpenalties are of real significance to only a very few women. Moreover,

Allred v. Heaton, 336 S.W. 2d 251 (1960), appeal dismissed and cert. denied,364 U.S. 517, rehearing denied, 364 U.S. 944; see also Heaton v. Bristol, 317S.W. 2d 86 (1958), appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 359 U.S. 230, rehearingdenied, 359 U.S. 999.

1" Commonwealth v. Daniel, 430 Pa. 642, 243 A. 2d 400 (1968); U.S. ex rel.Robinson v. York, 281 F. Supp. 8 (D. Conn., 1968).

12

the court decisions have notareas. The Kirstein case notcc,area vital to womeneducatioinsist on equal educational opremains unclear.

Different treatmcnt of men atsocial security benefits has betprocess and equal protection oF. 2d 591 (C.A. 2, 1968), cc.

Appeals stated that "the trentvariation in amounts of rctircnthe attributes of men and womalso stated:

There is here a rcasonahltive sought by the clas4disparity between the ecoa man and a womananobjective in affording tocomputations. There is.unreasonable about thelying the statutory diffcrcand women. Notwithstandto women in computing tpayments to mcn retirinawardcd women retiring aphasis supplied)

In a case involving a violation1967, the defendant raiscd tNthat sincc men but not womciForces, his rights to duc proc:were violated. United States v.1968). The Court stated:

In the Act and its prcdce:judgment that mcn shout(tion but that women, piregarded as the center (1

ociety no longer coddlessometimes brutal facts ofK such oblivion. . . .

oid embarrassment to thelid commendable but sucho constitutional mandates.

rcme Court declined to hear aAppeals had upheld the exclu-xas A. & M.15

al court dismissed as "moot" ao desegregate various all maleligher learning in the State of'viously ordered the University'omen plaintiffs' applications fora at Charlottesville and to sub-g the University at Charlottes-d Visitors of the University ofand Div. Civil No. 220-69R).

criminals as compared to male:r prison terms for women thanlaws in Pennsylvania and Con-

;stent with the equal protectionlent.1"

.rvice and criminal penalties.s in invoking the protection of

jury service is important as ao the lives of women. Criminaly a very few women. Moreover,

11. appeal dismissed and cert. denied,944; see also Heaton v. Bristol, 317

,cert. denied, 359 U.S. 230, rehearing

243 A. 2d 400 (1968); U.S. ex rel.nn., 1968).

12

the court decisions have not wiped out discrimination even in theseareas. The Kirstein case noted above represents some progress in anarea vital to womeneducation, but the extent to which women mayinsist on equal educational opportunities under the Constitution stillremains unclear.

Different treatment of men and women for purposes of computingsocial security benefits has been held not to violate the right to dueprocess and equal protection of the laws. Gruenwald v. Gardner, 390F. 2d 591 (C.A. 2, 1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 982. The Court ofAppeals stated that "the trend of authority makes it clear that thevariation in amounts of retirement benefits based upon differences inthe attributes of men and women is constitutionally valid." The Courtalso stated:

There is here a reasonable relationship between the objec-tive sought by the classification, which is to reduce thedisparity between the economic and physical capabilities ofa man and a womanand the means used to achieve thatobjective in affording to women more favorable benefitcomputations. There is, moreover, nothing arbitrary orunreasonable about the application of the principle under-lying the statutory differences in the computations for menand women. Notwithstanding the favorable treatment grantedto women in computing their benefits, the average monthlypayments to men retiring at age 62 still exceeds thoseawarded women retiring at that age. 390 F. 2d at 592. (Em-phasis supplied)

In a case involving a violation of the Military Selective Service Act of1967, the defendant raised the issuc of sex discrimination, chargingthat since men but not women are compelled to serve in the ArmedForces, his rights to due process of law under the Fifth Amendmentwere violated. United States v. St. Clair, 291 F. Supp. 122 (S.D. N.Y.,1968). The Court stated:

In the Act and its predecessors, Congress made a legislativejudgment that men should be subject to involuntary induc-tion but that womcn, presumably becausc they are "stillregarded as the center of homc and family life" (Hoyt v.

State of Florida, . . .), should not. Women may constitu-tionally be afforded "special rccognition" (cf. Gruenwaldv. Gardner, . . .) particularly sincc women arc not excludedfrom service in the Armed Forccs. . . .

In providing for involuntary service for men and voluntaryservice for women, Congress followed the teachings of historythat if a nation is to survive, men must provide the first lineof defense while women keep the home fires burning. 291 F.Supp. at 124-5. (Emphasis supplied)

In two recent cases, women sought to enjoin State officials from enforc-ing special restrictions on the hours of work of women on the groundthat such laws violate their rights to due process and equal protectionof the law under the Fourteenth Amendment. The three-judge Federalcourts (convened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2281, 2284) held that theconstitutional issue was insubstantial and that the three-judge courtlacked jurisdiction." The women argued that because of the Staterestrictive laws, they were deprived of opportunities for better payingjobs and overtime pay.

The President's Commission on the Status of Women stated in its 1963report, American Women, that it was

convinced that the U.S. Constitution now embodies equalityof rights for men and women. . . . But judicial clarificationis imperative in order that remaining ambiguities with respectto the constitutional protection of women's rights beeliminated. Early and definitive court pronouncement, par-ticularly by the U.S. Supreme Court, is urgently needed withregard to the validity under the 5th and 14th amendments oflaws and official practices discriminating against women, tothe end that the principle of equality become firmly estab-lished in constitutiona! doctrine. (GPO, page 45)

The position of women under the Constitution remains ambiguousin 1970.

" Mengelkoch v. Industrial Welfare Commission, 284 F. Supp. 950, 956 (C.D.Calif., 1968), three-judge order vacated, 393 U.S. 83, rehearing denied, 393U.S. 993. appeal pending in the Ninth Circuit; Ward v. Luttrell, 292 F. Supp.162, 165 (E.D. La. 1968).

13

Relationship Between tand Existing Con

It is, of course, possible that thefuture be interpreted by the cotin the law. Nothing in the prospreclude this from occurring; tiback, modify, or qualify any pron sex which may be affordedpointed out in Story, Comment('States (5th Edit, § 1938, 193

The securities of individualcannot be too frequently dewords; nor is it possible tencroachments of power.suspicion the propensity I

through the "cobweb chain

*

Conceding, therefore, thataccording to their true inttional provisions, State aisecurity for individual rigthe anxiety for further Froliwholly needless, the repctitexcused so long as the slitalready sufficiently deelarexist.

The proposed amendment wotequal treatment under the lawprotection against sex discrimamendment should prove to 1-Arenlightened interpretations of tlwould be done.

Supporters of the equal rightsof the 14th amendment is too trights to equality are too insccu

)uld not. Women may constitu-al recognition" (cf. Gruenwaldiv since women are not excludedForces. . . .

v service for men and voluntarys followed the teachings of history

men must provide the first linep the home fires burning. 291 F.supplied)

fit to enjoin State officials from enforc-iurs of work of women on the grounds to due process and equal protectionAmendment. The three-judge Federal.8 U.S.C. 2281, 2284) held that theantial and that the three-judge courten argued that because of the Stateved of opportunities for better paying

the Status of Women stat6d in its 1963it wasmstitution now embodies equality-ten. . . . But judicial clarification.cmaining ambiguities with respectotection of women's rights benitive court pronouncement, par-me Court, is urgently needed withr the 5th and 14th amendments ofdiscriminating against women, toof equality become firmly estab-

trine. (GPO, page 45)

the Constitution remains ambiguous

Commission, 284 F. Supp. 950, 956 (C.D.acated, 393 U.S. 83, rehearing denied, 393inth Circuit; Ward v. Luttrell, 292 F. Supp.

13

Relationship Between the Equal Rights Amendmentand Existing Constitutional Provisions

It is, of course, possible that the 5th and 14th amendments will in thefuture be interpreted by the courts as prohibiting all sex distinctionsin the law. Nothing in the proposed equal rights amendment wouldpreclude this from occurring; the amendment would in no way cutback, modify, or qualify any protection against discrimination basedon sex which may be afforded by the 5th and 14th amendments. Aspointed out in Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the UnitedStates (5th Edit, § 1938, 1939):

The securities of individual rights, it has often been observed,cannot be too frequently declared, nor in too many forms ofwords; nor is it possible to guard too vigilantly against theencroachments of power, nor to watch with too lively asuspicion the propensity of persons in authority to breakthrough the "cobweb chains of paper constitutions." . . .

* * * *

Conceding, therefore, that if correctly construed, and appliedaccording to their true intent and meaning, other constitu-tional provisions, State and national, might afford amplesecurity for individual rights, we may nevertheless pardonthe anxiety for further prohibitions, and concede that, even ifwholly needless, the repetition of such securities may well beexcused so long as the slightest doubt of their having beenalready sufficiently declared shall anywhere be found toexist.

The proposed amendment would secure the right of all persons toequal treatment under the law without any distinction as to sex. If theprotection against sex discrimination provided by the equal rightsamendment should prove to be duplicative of protections afforded byenlightened interpretations of the 5th and 14th amendments, no harmwould be done.

Supporters of the equal rights amendment believe that the potentialof the 14th amendment is too unclear and that women's constitutionalrights to equality are too insecure to rely exclusively on the possibility

of getting more enlightened court decisions under that amendment.

In a 1963 case, the Supreme Court stated:The Fifteenth Amendment prohibits a State from denying orabridging a Negro's right to vote. The Nineteenth Amend-ment does the same for women. . . . Once a geographical unitfor which a representative is to be chosen is designated, allwho participate in the election are to have an equal votewhatever their race, whatever their sex. . . . This is requiredby the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-ment. Gray v. Sanders, 372 U.S. 368, 379.

This interpretation of the 14th amendment reinforced and madedoubly secure the right to vote. There are numerous cases in whichthe Supreme Court has interpreted the 14th amendment to reinforceor to extend rights guaranteed by earlier or, as in the above case, lateramendments to the Constitution. For example, the more general dueprocess and equal protection concepts of the 5th and 14th amend-ments have been used to strengthen more specific rights of individualsto freedom of speech, assembly and religion guaranteed by the FirstAmendment; and the right to a speedy trial and the right to counselguaranteed by the Sixth.

If the equal rights amendment is adopted, the courts might well subse-quently interpret the Fourteenth Amendment as reinforcing constitu-tional equality for women. Certainly this possibility does not justifyfurther delay in approving the amendment.

Effect the Equal Rights Amendment Would Haveon Laws Differentiating on the Basis of Sex

Constitutional amendments, like statutes, are interpreted by the courtsin the light of intent of Congress. Committee reports on a proposal areregarded by the courts as the most persuasive evidence of the intendedmeaning of a provision. Therefore, the probable meaning and effectof the equal rights amendment can be ascertained from the SenateJudiciary Committee reports (which have been the same in recentyears):

1. The amendment would restrict only governmental action, andwould not apply to purely private action. What constitutes

14

"State action" woulment and as develotsubjects.

2. Special restrictionswould be unconstitibusiness as freely ti

rights of widows wt3. Women would be ei

tary service, but woiArmed Forces) whtare required to so

4. Restrictive work it»tional (e.g. maximrestrictions on wor;

5. Alimony laws woul)sex, but a divorceif she was granted (ing custody and airaccordance with tl

favoring either pare6. Laws granting matt

affected by the amcing sexual offenseprostitution).

Although the proposed amt.Congress and the States to cment would be largely self-after the 15th and 19th amenfor Negroes and women, restdid not render unconstituti,required the extension ofequal rights amendment woibe treated the same under tand 19th amendment, the ellthe words of sex identificatiostitutional, thereby extendingIn other cases, where the lav

under that amendment.

State from denying orNineteenth Amend-

cc a geographical unitosen is designated, allhave an equal vote

. . . This is requiredc Fourteenth Amend-379.

cnt reinforced and madenumerous cases in which

th amendment to reinforce. as in the above case, lateriple, the more general duethe 5th and 14th amend-pecific rights of individuals

on guaranteed by the Firstal and the right to counsel

he courts might well subse-ent as reinforcing constitu-possibility does not justify

vent Would Havee Basis of Sex

re interpreted by the courtsse reports on a proposal areve evidence of the intended

robable meaning and effectscertained from the Senate

been the same in recent

ly governmental action, andite action. What constitutes

14

"State action" would be the same as under the 14th amend-ment and as developed in 14th amendment litigation on othersubjects.

2. Special restrictions on property rights of married womenwould be unconstitutional; married women could engage inbusiness as freely as a member of the male sex; inheritancerights of widows would be same as for widowers.

3. Women would be equally subject to jury service and to mili-tary service, but women would not be required to serve (in theArmed Forces) where they are not fitted any more than menare required to so serve.

4. Restrictive work laws for women only would be unconstitu-tional (e.g. maximum hours, night work and weightliftingrestrictions on women).

5. Alimony laws would not favor women solely because of theirsex, but a divorce decree could award support to a motherif she was granted custody of the children. Matters concerning custody and support of children would be determined inaccordance with the welfare of the children and withoutfavoring either parent because of sex.

6. Laws granting maternity benefits to mothers would not beaffected by the amendment, nor would criminal laws govern-ing sexual offenses become unconstitutional (e.g. rape,prostitution).

Although the proposed amendment would specifically authorize theCongress and the States to enact implementing legislation, the amend-ment would be largely self-operative. The amendment is patternedafter the 15th and 19th amendments, which required equal voting rightsfor Negroes and women, respectively. The 15th and 19th amendmentsdid not render unconstitutional all State voting laws; they simplyrequired the extension of voting rights to Negroes and women. Theequal rights amendment would simply require that men and womenbe treated the same under the law. In some instances, like the 15thand 19th amendment, the effect of the amendment would be to strikethe words of sex identification in the law rather than render it uncon-stitutional, thereby extending the rights under the law to both sexes.In other cases, where the law serves only to restrict, deny or limit the

freedoms or rights of one sex, such restrictions would not be extendedto noth sexes; the law would be rendered unconstitutional. In stillother cases, the law is partially restrictive to persons of one sex in thatage limitations are imposed differently on males and females.

Following is a five-point analysis of the impact the equal rights amend-ment will have on the various types of Federal and State laws whichdistinguish on the basis of sex:

1. Strike the Words of Sex Identification and Apply the Law to BothSexes.

Where the law confers a benefit, privilege or obligation ofcitizenship, such would be extended to the other sex, i.e. theeffect of the amendment would be to strike the words of sexidentification. Thus, such laws would not be rendered uncon-stitutional but would be extended to apply to both sexes byoperation of the amendment, in the same way that laws per-taining to voting were extended to Negroes and women underthe 15th and 19th amendments.

Examples of such laws include: laws which permit alimony to beawarded under certain circumstances to wives but not to husbands;social security and other social benefits legislation which give greaterbenefits to one sex than the other; exclusion of women from the require-ments of the Military Selective Service Act of 1967 (i.e., women wouldbe equally subject to military conscription).

Any expression of preference in the law for the mother in child custodycases would be extended to both parents (as against claims of thirdparties). Children are entitled to support from both parents under theexisting laws of most States.'s Child support laws would be affectedonly if they discriminate on the basis of sex. The amendment wouldnot prohibit the requiring of one parent to provide financial supportfor children who are in the custody of the other.

2. Laws Rendered Unconstitutional by the Amendment.

im Reciprocal State Legislation to Enforce the Support of Dependents, Council ofState Governments, 1964, page 20.

15

3(1

Where a law restrictsmen, as the case may bement would be to rend

Examples arc: the exclusionpublic schools; State laws piwork for women or the wcizhibiting women from work'tenders; laws placing, specmarried women, such as ndomicile.

3. Removal of Age Distinct

Sonic laws which apply toand thereby discriminate asmales and females. Under tisuch laws would be equal;benefits, privileges or oppoitwould mean that as to somboth sexes. For example:women would apply to botlabor laws would apply toof marrying or working WOL!removed.

As to other laws, the hipexample: a higher cut-off agwould apply to girls as wejurisdiction would apply alepaternal support or juveniiboth sexes.

Thus, the test in &termini!by applying the lower age ois as follows:

If the age limitationthe lower age applies:benefit or privilege to tlimit individual frecdo.

h restrictions would not be extendedc rendered unconstitutional. In stillstrictive to persons of one sex in that.ntly on males and females.

)1 the impact the equal rights amend-nes of Federal and State laws which

Lineation and Apply the Law to Both

mefit, privilege or obligation ofxtended to the other sex, i.e. theuld be to strike the words of sexs would not be rendered uncon-

cnded to apply to both sexes by. in the same way that laws per-ied to Negroes and women undercats.

: laws which permit alimony to beances to wives but not to husbands;)enefits legislation which give greaterexclusion of women from the require-

.rvice Act of 1967 (i.e., women wouldnscription).

the law for the mother in child custodyparents (as against claims of third

) support from both parents under the:hild support laws would be affectedbasis of sex. The amendment would

c parent to provide financial support-)dy of the other.

ional by the Amendment.

orce the Support of Dependents, Council of

15

Where a law restricts or denies opportunities of women ormen, as the case may be, the effect of the equal rights amend-ment would be to render such laws unconstitutional.

Examples arc: the exclusion of women from State universities or otherpublic schools; State laws placing special restrictions on the hours ofwork for women or the weights women may lift on the job; laws pro-hibiting women from working in certain occupations, such as bar-tenders; laws placing special restrictions on the legal capacity ofmarried women, such as making contracts or establishing a legaldomicile.

3. Removal of Age Distinctions Based on Sex.

Some laws which apply to both sexes make an age distinction by sexand thereby discriminate as to persons between the ages specified formales and females. Under the foregoing analysis, the agcs specified insuch laws would be equalized by the amendment by extending thebenefits, privileges or opportunities under the law to both sexes. Thiswould mean that as to some such laws, the lower age would apply toboth sexes. For example: a lower minimum age for marriage forwomen would apply to both sexes; a lower age for boys under childlabor laws would apply to girls as well. In other words, the privilegesof marrying or working would be extended and the sex discriminationremoved.

As to other laws, the higher age would apply to both sexes. Forexample: a higher cut-off age for the right to paternal support for boyswould apply to girls as well; a higher age for girls for juvenile courtjurisdiction would apply also to boys. In these cases, the benefits ofpaternal support or juvenile court jurisdiction would be extended toboth sexes.

Thus, the test in determining whether these laws are to be equalizedby applying the lower age or by applying the higher age to both sexesis as follows:

If the age limitation restricts individual liberty and freedomthe lower age applies; if the age limitation confers a right,benefit or privilege to the individuals concerned and does notlimit individual freedom, the higher age applies.

4. Laws Which Could Not Possibly Apply to Both Sexes Because ofthe Difference in Reproductive Capacity.

Laws which, as a practical matt:r, can apply to only one sex no matterhow they are phrased, such as laws providing maternity benefits andlaws prohibiting rape, would not be affected by the amendment. Theextension of these laws to both sexes would be purely academic, sincesuch laws would not apply differently if they were phrased in termsof both sexes. In these situations, the terminology of sex identificationis of no consequence.'"

5. Separation of the Sexes.

Separation of the sexes by law would be forbidden under theamendment except in situations where the separation is

shown to be necessary because of an overriding and com-pelling public interest and does not deny individual rightsand liberties.

For example, in our present culture the recognition of the right toprivacy would justify separate restroom facilities in public buildings.

As shown above, the amendment would not change the substance ofexisting laws, except that those which restrict and deny opportunitiesto women would be rendered unconstitutional under the standard ofpoint two of the analysis. In all other cases, the laws presently on thebooks would simply be equalized, and this includes the entire body offamily law. Moreover, the amendment in no way would restrict theState legislature or the Congress in enacting legislation on any subject,since its only purpose and effect is to prohibit any distinction basedon sex classification.

Objections to the Proposed Equal Rights Amendment

Objection: The equal rights amendment is not needed because womenalready have equal rights under the 5th and 14th amendments.

Answer: The extent to which women may invoke the protection of thedue process and equal protection guarantees of the 5th and 14th

'"See Murray and Eastwood, "Jane Crow and the Law: Sex Discrimination andTitle VII" 34 G.W.L. Rev. 232, 240-241 (1965).

16

3 E.)

amendments is unclear. In factupheld sex distinctions in theprovisions. Even if the 5th andconstrued so as to eliminate allrights amendment would sirnpl\treatment doubly secure.

Objection: If the amendment wewith litigation because the meate.g., what are the various "right."equality" mean?

Answer: The equal rights amenciition unless there were massiveamendment's requirement of cqthat happened, it would only preyThe "right" protected by the anmeld under the law, whatever tiidistinction based on sex.

Objection: The amendment wevariety of State laws which now t

Answer: Some State lawsthoseof one sexwould be violativerendered unconstitutional. La\,privileges on one sex would havwould not be rendered unconstit

Objection: The amendment wotpertaining to the family.

A nswer: The amendment woulwhere the law provides for alimoalimony to husbands as well, unrespect to wives. (More than 'Abe awarded to either spouse.)legally responsible for the suppocase under existing law.

Objection: The amendment won'laws for womcn, such as those g(

to Both Sexes Because of

to only one sex no matterg maternity benefits andI by the amendment. Thebe purely academic, since

were phrased in terms)logy of sex identification

forbidden under thec the separation is,verriding and corn-ny individual rights

cognition of the right tolities in public buildings.

change the substance of.t and deny opportunitiesal under the standard ofthe laws presently on theeludes the entire body ofo way would restrict thelegislation on any subject,ibit any distinction based

fights Amendment

t needed because women14th amendments.

'oke the protection of thees of the 5th and 14th

Law: Sex Discrimination and

16

amendments is unclear. In fact, some recent court decisions haveupheld sex distinctions in the law, in spite of these constitutionalprovisions. Even if the 5th and 14th amendments are in future casesconstrued so as to eliminate all sex distinctions in the law, the, equalrights amendment would simply make the individual's right to equaltreatment doubly secure.

Objection: If the amendment were adopted the courts would be floodedwith litigation because the meaning of the amendment is not clear;e.g., what are the various "rights" that would be protected? What does"equality" mean?

Answer: The equal rights amendment would not cause excessive litiga-tion unless there were massive resistance to compliance with theamendment's requirement of equal treatment of men and women. Ifthat happened, it would only prove the great need for the amendment.The "right" protected by the amendment is the right to equal treat-ment under the law, whatever the subject of the law may be, withoutdistinction based on sex.

Objection: The amendment would render unconstitutional a widevariety of State laws which now treat men and women differently.

Answer: Some State lawsthose which deny rights or restrict freedomsof one sexwould be violative of the equal rights amendment andrendered unconstitutional. Laws which confer rights, benefits andprivileges on one sex would have to apply to both sexes equally, butwould not be rendered unconstitutional by the 4mendment.

Objection: The amendment would require sweeping changes in lawspertaining to the family.

Answer: The amendment would simply require equality. In Stateswhere the law provides for alimony only for wives, courts could awardalimony to husbands as well, under the same conditions as apply withrespect to wives. (More than 1/2 of the States now permit alimony tobe awarded to either spouse.) Mothers and fathers would both belegally responsible for the support of their children, as is generally thecase under existing law.

Objection: The amendment would nullify special State protective laborlaws for women, such as those governing limitations on hours of work,

3/

weightlifting on the job, and prohibitions against night work, forwomen employees only.

Answer: This issue is fast becoming moot, because the Federal law(Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) prohibits sex discrimina-tion in employment and requires employers covered by the Act to treatmen and women equally. A number of States have already concededthat special restrictions on women may no longer be enforced.

Objection: Women would be equally subject to the draft.

Answer: This is true. Women do serve in the Armed Forces now, buton a volunteer basis. The amendment would also prohibit morestringent eligibility standards for women than for men volunteers.

Objection: The equal rights amendment would require equal rights andresponsibilities for women under the law.

A nswer: True.[Where the term GPO is mentioned in the text or in footnotes, the documentsare available from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office,Washington, D.C. 20402.]

Appendix B

THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT-WHAT IT WILL AND WON'T DO

THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENTS. The proposed Equal RightsAmendment to the Constitution reads as follows:

Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied orabridged by the United States or by any State on account ofsex. (Emphasis supplied)

GENERAL EFFECT ON FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS AND OFFICIALPRACTICES. The Equal Rights Amendment would not nullify all lawsdistinguishing on the basis of sex, but would require that the law treatmen and wome- equally. Equal treatment can be accomplished eitherby extending the law which applies only to one sex to the other sex,or by rendering the law unconstitutional as denying equality of rightsto one sex. The consideration of the ratification of the Equal RightsAmendment by the individual States will give ample opportunity and

17

time for States to decide on r

Amendment where needed. Aas no distinctions are based (,1

In interpreting the Equal Rigithe intent of Congress, particinents of the Amendment.proposed amendment would lithe Amendment and in Senatt

ALIMONY, CHILD SUPPORT,not be invalidated. In those Stmen will become eligible unc12welfare of the child will be Imost States now. Provisions ,)ence will be inoperative.

The National Commissionersa Uniform Marriage and Div(with the Equal Rights Amenspouse (called "maintenancspouses in accordance with 11of the child.

It should be kept in mind thmcnts covering these arew,litigation.

DOWER RIGHTS. Dower lawbe extended to men in thosein their wives' estates.

PROPERTY RIGHTS OF MANZIcrty rights of married won-ILcould engage in business asproperty such as inheritancL.

STATUS OF HOMEMAKER. Ccon August 10 in the debateEqual Rights Amendment:It would not down-grade th

ns against night work, for

iot, because the Federal law04) prohibits sex discrimina-rs covered by the Act to treatStates have already concededo longer be enforced.

lea to the draft.

the Armed Forces now, butt would also prohibit morethan for men volunteers.

would require equal rights andv.

xt or in footnotes, the documentsnents, Government Printing Office,

M ENDM ENT-WON'T DO

Me proposed Equal Rightsfollows:

shall not be denied orv any State on account of

STATE LAWS AND OFFICIALlent would not nullify all laws.ould require that the law treat:nt can be accomplished eitherv to one sex to the other sex,

il as denying equality of rightsatification of the Equal Rightsill give ample opportunity and

17

time for States to decide on modifications to adjust their laws to theAmendment where needed. Any modifications could be made so longas no distinctions are based on sex.

In interpreting the Equal Rights Amendment, the Courts will considerthe intent of Congress, particularly the views expressed by the propo-nents of the Amendment. The following is a summary of effects theproposed amendment would have, as reflected in the House debate onthe Amendment and in Senate reports in previous years.

ALIMONY, CHILD SUPPORT, AND CUSTODY LAWS. Present laws willnot be invalidated. In those States where alimony is limited to women,men will become eligible under the same circumstances as women. Thewelfare of the child will be the criterion for child custody as it is inmost States now. Provisions of law giving mothers (or fathers) prefer-ence will be inoperative.

The National Commissioners on Uniform State Laws recently adopteda Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act, the terms of which are in accordwith the Equal Rights Amendment. It provides for alimony for eitherspouse (called "maintenance"), child support obligations for bothspouses in accordance with their means, and custody based on welfareof the child.

It should be kept in mind that the great majority of divorce arrange-ments covering these areas are agreed to by the parties withoutlitigation.

DOWER RIGHTS. Dower laws will not be nullified. Dower rights willbe extended to men in those few States where men do not have a rightin their wives' estates.

PROPERTY RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. Special restrictions on prop-erty rights of married women would be invalidated; married womencould engage in business as freely as men and manage their separateproperty such as inheritances and earnings.

STATUS OF HOMEMAKER. Congresswoman Dwyer of New Jersey saidon August 10 in the debate in the House of Representatives on theEqual Rights Amendment: "It would not take women out of the home.It would not down-grade the roles of mother and housewife. Indeed,

it would give new dignity to these important roles. By confirmingwomen's equality under the law, by upholding women's right to chooseher place in society, the equal rights amendment can only enhancethe status of traditional women's occupations. For thcsc would becomepositions accepted by women as equals, not roles imposed on themas inferiors." (116 Cong. Record, H. 7952)

STATE "PROTECTIVE" LABOR LAWS NOW APPLYING ONLY TO WOMEN.Minimum wage laws and rest period and lunch period laws will bcextended to men. Laws prohibiting hours of work beyond a specifiednumber, night work, employment in particular occupations, andweightlifting laws will be invalidated. There will probably not be anyof the prohibitory laws in effect by the time thc Equal Rights Amend-ment is ratified, as a result of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.Leading court decisions, changes by State legislatures, rulings by StateAttorneys General, and guidelines of the Equal Employment Oppor-tunity Commission all clearly point in this dircction.

The Equal Rights Amendment would not prohibit special maternitybenefits. Furthermore, only Puerto Rico gives any special benefit andits terms may discourage employers from hiring women. In fact, lawsin several States prohibit employment of women during specifiedperiods before and after childbirth but do not require reemploymentor even require employers to give any of the benefits given for otherforms of temporary disability. Two States have temporary disabilityinsurance plans that include benefits for loss of employment due tochildbirth along with other types of temporary disability, but this is nota special benefit.

EMPLOYMENT. The Equal Rights Amendment would restrict onlygovernmental action and would not apply to purely private action. Itwould not affect private employment; it would prohibit discriminationby Government as an employerFederal, State, County, and City,including school boards. One of the largest group of employees affectedare teachers, professors, and othcr employees of public schools andState institutions of highcr education. It would require equal pay forequal work only for employees of Government. Thc coverage ofprivate employees under present equal pay laws would not bc extendedor otherwise modified.

18

40

EDUCATION. The Equal Rights Amerof public schools to one sex and it \

from requiring higher admission stand;any cxist).

FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY. The Eextend to widowers of covered wom.vided only to widows of covered menwith minor children would receive awife's employment undcr thc same eh-children would receive.

A man retiring at age 62 would havesame formula as a woman retiringwould be corrected by the Social Seem-the House of Representatives this se.s,:Senate.)

OTHER GOVERNMENTAL PENSION A'preference in trcatmcnt given to onewould be extended to the othcr sex.would have no bcaring on private pensarc now covered by Title VII of thc Ci

MILITARY SERVICE AND JURY SERVICIjury scrvicc and military service uncleWomen with children in their person.either obligation just as mcn could beBcing subjcct to military service WOwould have to serve in all assignment:in all assignments. Women volunteers wthe same standards as mcn; thcy nowDuring World War II many thousandsin dangerous assignments. This Adminto move to a volunteer scrvicc; thc issbe moot by the time the Amendment ;

CRIMINAL LAW. Thc Equal Rights Antprescribing longer prison sentences fosame offense (or vice versa, if such ex',

to these important roles. By confirminglaw, by upholding women's right to chooseitial rights amendment can only enhanceen's occupations. For these would become

as equals, not roles imposed on themccord, H. 7952)

LAWS NOW APPLYING ONLY TO WOMEN.'st period and lunch period laws will beiibiting hours of work beyond a specifiedloyment in particular occupations, andialidated. There will probably not be anyect by the time the Equal Rights Amend-Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

rigs by State legislatures, rulings by State':clines of the Equal Employment Oppor-v point in this direction.

cnt would not prohibit special maternityPuerto Rico gives any special benefit andployers from hiring women. In fact, lawsemployment of women during specifiedidbirth but do not require reemployment) give any of the benefits given for other[v. Two States have temporary disability

benefits for loss of employment due topes of temporary disability, but this is not

Rights Amendment would restrict onlyuld not apply to purely private action. /t=loyment; it would prohibit discrimination.oyerFederal, State, County, and City,r of the largest group of employees affectedJ other employees of public schools andducation. It would require equal pay for)yees of Government. The coverage of;cnt equal pay laws would not be extended

18

40

EDUCATION. The Equal Rights Amendment would prohibit restrictionof public schools to one sex and it would prohibit public institutionsfrom requiring higher admission standards for women (or men in caseany exist).

FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY. The Equal Rights Amendment wouldextend to widowers of covered women workers the benefits now pro-vided only to widows of covered men workers. For example, widowerswith minor children would receive a benefit based on their deceasedwife's employment under the same circumstances a widow with minorchildren would receive.

A man retiring at age 62 would have his benefit computed under thesame formula as a woman retiring at 62. (This particular inequitywould be corrected by the Social Security Act Amendments that passedthe House of Representatives this seccinn and arc now pending in theSenate.)

OTHER GOVERNMENTAL PENSION AND RETIREMENT PLANS. Anypreference in treatment given to one sex or to survivors of one sexwould be extended to the other sex. The Equal Rights Amendmentwould have no bearing on private pension and retirement plans. Manyarc now covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

MILITARY SERVICE AND JURY SERVICE. Women would be subject tojury service and military service under the same conditions as men.Women with children in their personal care could be excused fromeither obligation just as men could be under the same circumstances.Being subject to military service would not necessarily mean theywould have to serve in all assignments any more than all men servein all assignments. Women volunteers would have to be admitted underthe same standards as men; they now have to meet higher standards.During World War II many thousands of women served, many of themin dangerous assignments. This Administration is making every effortto move to a volunteer service; the issue of the draft may, therefore,be moot by the time the Amendment is ratified.

CRIMINAL LAW. The Equal Rights Amendment would invalidate lawsprescribing longer prison sentences for women than for men for thesame offense (or vice versa, if such exist), different ages for treatment

41

as adults for purposes of criminal law, and laws permitting imprison-ment of women who have not committed any offense. It would requireequal opportunity for rehabilitation, including access to treatment fordrug addiction and alcoholism. It would not affect laws relating to rape.

PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL. The Equal Rights Amendment willdirectly affect only women's legal rights. It will not affect thd socialrelationships between the sexes.

There arc, however, intangible psychological benefits already accruingto women. The fight for the Equal Rights Amendment is forging anew solidarity among women that fosters self-confidence and thecourage to use rights already theirs but not claimed because of fears.

Womens of all ages and political persuasion, all occupations, black andwhite, union women and business women, housewives and workingwomen, have worked together with men to secure passage of the EqualRights Amendment in the House of Representatives.

SOURCES:

Congressional Record, August 10, 1970. Debate on Equal Rights Amendment,beginning page #7947, Superintendent of Documents, Government PrintingOffice, Washington, D.C. 20402, 36¢ per copy.

Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Memorandum on EqualRights Amendment, Washington, D.C. 20210. Single copies free.

Hearings on Equal Rights Amendment before Subcommittee on ConstitutionalAmendments of the Senate Judiciary Committee, May 5, 6, and 7, 1970. Not yetpublished; write Subcommittee, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20510.

Susan De ller Ross, "Sex Discrimination and 'Protective' Labor Legislation,"single copies available from Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women.

The Report of the President's Task Force on Women's Rights and Responsibili-ties, A Matter of Simple Justice, April 1970. Single copies available from theCitizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women.

National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, "UniformMarriage and Divorce Act," 1155 East 60th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637,August 14, 1970.

Speech by Senator Marlow Cook on August 25, 1970, in the Senate, Vol. 116,No. 148, Cong. Rec., p. S 14213.

August 28, 1970

19

4 L,)

Appendix C

STATEMENT ON BAYH SUBSTITUTEAMENDMENT TO THE EQUAL RIGHTS

The Citizens' Advisory Council on the Statusrejects the proposed substitute to the Equal Rigithe following reasons:

1. The Bayh substitute negates the purposeAmendment, which is to guarantee comp)men and women under the Constitution.

2. The substitute implies that women are pscope of the 5th and 14th Amendments.

3. The proposed substitute would lend crCourt interpretations that sex is a reasfor legal purposes and the very unreasolclassification has been a major factorEqual Rights Amendment, Women shout'for special treatment in the law under nn'whether it be the test of "reasonableneand overriding public interest."

4. The substitute would in effect encouragenation against women in the law bydiscretion to decide when and where andtreated as second class citizens.

5. The purpose of the substitute as express,ponent is unclear. Is it the intent of tliextend the restrictive hours and weightlIf so, such would be contrary to Federal cTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

The Council renews its support of H.J. Res. 264in their original form without any amendments of ain the House-passed Equal Rights Amendmeapproval in this Congress.

For the following reasons we reject the amendmcwhich would exempt women from the draft: 1

4

ind laws permitting imprison-I any offense. It would requirehiding access to treatment fornot affect laws relating to rape.

'nal Rights Amendment wills. It will not affect the social

ical benefits already accruingLihts Amendment is forging asters self-confidence and theicit claimed because of fears.

Ion, all occupations, black and»en, housewives and workingto secure passage of the Equal)resentatives.

)ate on Equal Rights Amendment,Documents, Government PrintingV.

Women, Memorandum on EqualSingle copies free.

re Subcommittee on Constitutionaltee, May 5, 6, and 7, 1970. Not yetWashington, D.C. 20510.

Id 'Protective' Labor Legislation,"v Council on the Status of Women.

Women's Rights and Responsibili-). Single copies available from the,Vomen.

Uniform State Laws, "Uniformth Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637,

I 25, 1970, in the Senate, Vol. 116,

19

Appendix C

STATEMENT ON BAYH SUBSTITUTE AND ERVINAMENDMENT TO THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT

The Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women stronglyrejects the proposed substitute to the Equal Rights Amendment forthe following reasons:

1. The Bayh substitute negates the purpose of the Equal RightsAmendment, which is to guarantee complete legal equality ofmen and women under the Constitution.

2. The substitute implies that women are presently beyond thescope of the 5th and 14th Amendments. This is not true.

3. The proposed substitute would lend credence to SupremeCourt interpretations that sex is a reasonable classificationfor legal purposes and the very unreasonableness of such aclassification has been a major factor in the drive for theEqual Rights Amendment. Women should not be singled outfor special treatment in the law under any constitutional testwhether it be the test of "reasonableness" or a "compellingand overriding public interest."

4. The substitute would in effect encourage continued discrimi-nation against women in the law by allowing the courtsdiscretion to decide when and where and how women may betreated as second class citizens.

5. The purpose of the substitute as expressed by the chief pro-ponent is unclear. Is it the intent of the chief proponent toextend the restrictive hours and weightlifting laws to men?If so, such would be contrary to Federal court decisions underTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Council renews its support of H.J. Res. 264 and/or S.J. Res. 61in their original form without any amendments of any kind. Any changein the House-passed Equal Rights Amendigent would precludeapproval in this Congress.

For the following reasons we reject the amendment to H.J. Res. 264which would exempt women from the draft: There are benefits to

43

individuals, usually ignored, which derive from voluntary and com-pulsory military service. The opportunities for education and trainingafford our young people advantages for upward mobility instead ofbeing locked into any particular economic stratum. Forty-one thousandwomen are now serving in the military.The young women of this country should not be denied the opportunityfor complete training for the defense of themselves and their families,and for the preservation of their homes and their country.The Equal Rights Amendment (H.J. Res. 264S.J. Res. 61), ifadopted, will provide a new constitutional mandate to give womenthe legal equality due them. Failure to approve the Amendment inthis Congress would be a denial of "a matter of simple justice."

Adopted October 29, 1970November 3, 1970

NOTE: The Council's statement was prepared before Senator Bayh'spress release of November 2, 1970. Nevertheless, the onlypart that may be inapplicable to the latest proposal for asubstitute is the first sentence of Item No. 3.

Appendix D

JOB-RELATED MATERNITY BENEFITS

The Council adopted the following Statement of Principles on October29, 1970:

Childbirth and complications of pregnancy are, for all job-related purposes, temporary disabilities and should be treatedas such under any health insurance, temporary disabilityinsurance, or sick leave plan of an employer, union, orfraternal society. Any policies or practices of an employeror union, written or unwritten, applied to instances of tempo-rary disability other than pregnancy should be applied toincapacity due to pregnancy or childbirth, including policiesor practices relating to leave of absence, restoration or recallto duty, and seniority.No additional or different benefits or restrictions should beapplied to disability because of pregnancy or childbirth, and

20

no pregnant womanin relation to job-,employee similarly

GENERAL BACKGROUI'

1. There is now no unitpregnancy under existsystems providing proincome due to temporfrom employment nepregnancy are sornet:ability insurance and/are excluded from surelated health insuranmedical costs associawith special limitationSometimes employeesa given number of weis reason for dischar12

Considerable interestand private employer.:hopes, in answer to repwhat seems to us to beunder our present cyst

2. There are no Governmedical costs of child'programs; nor are theyloss of income due toprivate sick leave or t.

FEDERAL SOCIAL SEC

3. The Federal social sehave a national healthfor employed personsrary disability. Euroiwithin such a framewoi

Lc from voluntary and com-s for education and trainingupward mobility instead ofstratum. Forty-one thousand

not be denied the opportunityhemselves and their families,nd their country.es. 264S.J. Res. 61), if

nal mandate to give womenapprove the Amendment inner of simple justice."

November 3, 1970

'pared before Senator Bayh's1970. Nevertheless, the onlyto the latest proposal for aItem No. 3.

ITY BENEFITS

lent of Principles on October

gnancy are, for all job -ics and should be treatede, temporary disability[11 employer, union, orractices of an employer!d to instances of tempo-v should be applied toibirth, including policies

,nee, restoration or recall

Or restrictions should bemancy or childbirth, and

20

no pregnant woman employee should be in a better positionin relation to job-related practices or benefits than anemployee similarly situated suffering from other disability.

GENERAL BACKGROUND

1. There is now no uniformity of treatment for disability because ofpregnancy under existing job-related insurance and leave with paysystems providing protection against medical costs and/or loss ofincome due to temporary disability. In the United States absencesfrom employment necessitated by childbirth or complications ofpregnancy are sometimes covered by job-related temporary dis-ability insurance and/or sick leave plans. Sometimes such absencesare excluded from such plans or included with special limits. Job-related health insurance plans may cover hospital and/or othermedical costs associated with pregnancy; may cover such costswith special limitations; or may not cover maternity costs at all.Sometimes employees have reemployment rights after absence ofa given number of weeks due to pregnancy; sometimes pregnancyis reason for discharge.

Considerable interest has been evidenced in this subject by publicand private employers and unions in recent months. The Councilhopes, in answer to requests, that it may be of service by suggestingwhat seems to us to be the most equitable and reasonable approachunder our present system of private and government social benefits.

2. There are no Government data available on the extent to whichmedical costs of childbirth are covered in private health insuranceprograms; nor are there any data available on the extent to whichloss of income due to absence because of childbirth is covered byprivate sick leave or temporary disability insurance programs.

FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

3. The Federal social security system of the United States does nothave a national health program or insurance against loss of incomefor employed persons who are unable to work because of tempo-rary disability. European countries provide maternity benefitswithin such a framework. In no European country does an employer

4 5

pay a higher contribution for female employees than for male ;imitations on these bcncfits whichemployees.' disabilities.' Cases of abnormal deli

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

4. The Federal government has for its own employees a sick leavesystem providing 13 days of sick leave at full pay per year, whichmay be accumulated without limit. Sick leave, vacation leave, andleave without pay may be used for abscnccs due to pregnancy.Government employees have the option, with the Governmentsharing in the cost, of subscribing to a variety of health insuranceplans, all of which include costs of delivery and pre-natal care intheir family plan coverage.

Sonic State governments have sick leave systems, which may ormay not cover abscnccs because of childbirth.

TEMPORARY DISABILITY INSURANCE

5. Insurance against loss of income for employed persons unable towork temporarily because of disability is usually called "temporarydisability insurance;" it may be government-sponsored or providedby employers, unions, or fraternal groups. Temporary disabilityinsurance usually provides for less than full pay for maximumperiods of about 26 weeks. Sick leave plans ordinarily provide fullpay for short periods each year, with sonic plans permittingaccumulations of unused leave from year to year.

6. Government-sponsored temporary disability insurance systems existin California, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, andPuerto Rico. The railroad industry also has a temporary disabilityinsurance system administered by the Railroad Retirement Board.These systems arc financed solely by employee contributions or byjoint employer-employee contributions.

Of the State laws, only those of New Jersey and Rhode Islandrequire payment of benefits for a normal delivery, and they put

U.S. Department of Health. Education. and Welfare, Social Security Adminis-tration: Social Security Programs throughout the World-1969, Research ReportNo. 31, pp. 10. 14, 22, 58, 62, 72, 74, 80, 86, 98, 110, 114, 136, 154, 164,

176, 178, 180, 196, 202, 204, 218, 226, and 242.

21

(11;

7. Sonic employers and some State temrchildbirth as a temporary disability atphysiological condition." The Counc'of employment it is a temporary discno difference whether an employee isjob bccausc of pregnancy or becauseillness or accident; in any case he 0has extra medical expenses.

The notion that pregnancy is a "nohas been advanced as a reason forvidcd for temporary disabilities andproviding leaves of absence not piSince there arc no existing systemsabsence or insurance bcncfits for "nora variety of policies for this special ccreate an inequity between benefitspregnancy and bcncfits bccausc of alA woman about to give birth is tearunder the care of a physician, and is

SPECIAL BENEFITS

8. The Council considered whether spcprovided for other temporary disabiwomen arc subject all the otherbe argued that additional bcncfits alline of reasoning treats women asdifferences. The essence of the faitvidual rather than class treatment.

`Those interested in further details on tempo!'should see the Citizens' Advisory Councilthe Task Force on Social Insurance, and Tu.also U.S. Department of Labor, "ComparisoiLaws," BES No. U-141, Rev. August 1970.

ale employees than for male

ES

s own employees a sick leaveaye at full pay per year, whichSick leave, vacation leave, and)r absences due to pregnancy.option, with the Governmento a variety of health insurancedelivery and pre-natal care in

leave systems, which may orchildbirth.

CE

it employed persons unable toity is usually called "temporaryernment-sponsored or providedi groups. Temporary disabilitys than full pay for maximumtve plans ordinarily provide full

with some plans permitting11 year to year.

lisability insurance systems existNew York, Rhode Island, andalso has a temporary disabilityhe Railroad Retirement Board.)y employee contributions or byions.

New Jersey and Rhode Islandnormal delivery, and they put

d Welfare, Social Security Adminis-ra the World'969, Research Reporto, 86, 98, 110, 114, 136, 154, 164,d 242.

21

limitations on these benefits which are not applicable to otherdisabilities:' Case:. of abnormal delivery are usually covered.

7. Sonic employers and some State temporary disability systems treatchildbirth as a temporary disability and some consider it a "normalphysiological condition." The Council concluded that for purposesof employment it is a temporary disability. Economically it makesno difference whether an employee is unable to work at his regularjob because of pregnancy or because of hcrnia, ulcers, or any otherillness or accident; in any case he or she suffers loss of pay andhas extra medical expenses.

The notion that pregnancy is a "normal physiological condition"has been advanced as a reason for denying women benefits pro-vided for temporary disabilities and occasionally as a reason forproviding leaves of absence not provided for other disabilities.Since there are no existing systems or guides for giving leave ofabsence or insurance benefits for "normal physiological conditions,"a variety of policies for this special category result. Some of thesecreate an inequity between benefits because of disability due topregnancy and benefits because of all other temporary disabilities.A woman about to give birth is temporarily disabled for work, isunder the care of a physician, and is usually hospitalized.

SPECIAL BENEFITS

8. The Council considered whether special benefits for maternity notprovided for other temporary disabilities are ever justified. Sincewomen are subject to all the other disabilities of mankind, it canbe argued that additional benefits are needed for pregnancy. Thisline of reasoning treats women as a class and ignores individualdifferences. The essence of the fair employment concept is indi-vidual rather than class treatment.

=Those interested in further details on temporary disability insurance in the U.S.should see the Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Report ofthe Task Force on Social Insurance and Taxes, p. 8 et seq. and p. 45 et seq.;also U.S. Department of Labor, "Comparison of State Unemployment InsuranceLaws," BES No. U-141, Rev. August 1970.

Individual women who are not pregnant and individual men maybe absent morc in a given period of time because of temporarydisabilities than women who are having babies during that period.The 1961 survey of the Civil Service Commission of sick leaveusage by Federal employees shows small differences in the per-centages of men and women having zcro sick leave balances andnegative sick leave balances (those who have been advanced sick;cave), indicating that the present system is inadequate for asmall percentage of both men and women.

Annual Public Health Service surveys show that women and menlose about the same amount of time from work because of acutedisabilities, including childbirth and complications of pregnancy.In 1968, men averaged 5.2 days per year and women 5.9 days peryear; in 1967 it was 5.3 and 5.6 days per year.

Giving special treatment for pregnancy will inevitably lead to situa-tions in which men and other women who are suffering fromdisabilities other than pregnancy will have less benefits than preg-nant women. This is not sociologically or economically justifiedand would be divisive. In addition, in the United Statcs wherethe employer frequently pays all or part of the cost of such bcnefits,such policies could very well result in reluctance to hirc women ofchildbearing age.

Appendix E

REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON COUNSELINGAND CONTINUING EDUCATION

RECOMMENDATIONS ON COUNSELING WOMEN AND GIRLS

With rising numbers of women in our Nation assuming the dualresponsibilities of homemaking and cmploymcnt, thcrc is a growingurgency to ensure the cooperation of educators and counselors in pro-viding young girls with a realistic picture of their probable life pattcrnand understanding of thc wide range of vocational possibilities bcforcthem. Much of the vocational counseling which girls and women receiveis inadequate and obsolete. It fails to recognize the importance ofthree major factors: (1) the multiple roles of women in modernsociety (40 percent of marricd women work), (2) the emergence of

22

broadcr cmploymcnt horizonto a young girl as well aspreparation for job futureinterests.

Concern over population gr(opportunity for women to

In order to help update andseling available for women

1. The Office of Educatithe prestige and influcby providing curriculaassistancc aimed at it

guidance programs inof thc disadvantagedwidened beyOnd his naware that there arcabout which his pare:little.

To rcinforce supportOffice of Education shc,among its own professa

2. The Office of Educat;itheir enrollment in cccounselors and =chef ;the multiple roles thatfor girls to obtain acle(1role and the importaiipresent and emergingaccording to their into ;'

3. The Office of Educatiopreparation and upurathe special counselingand secondary schoolslion. Such encourage:Ilipresently employed cot

ant and individual men maytime because of temporary

mg babies during that period.cc Commission of sick leave,;mall differences in the per-zero sick leave balances andvho have been advanced sicksystem is inadequate for aimen.

's show that women and menfrom work because of acutecomplications of pregnancy.

year and women 5.9 days per.; per year.

y will inevitably lead to situa-men who are suffering from

have less benefits than preg-ally or economically justified

in the United States where:u-t of the cost of such benefits,n reluctance to hire women of

TEE ON COUNSELINGEDUCATION

LING WOMEN AND GIRLS

it Nation assuming the dualployment, there is a growingucators and counselors in pro-2 of their probable life patternvocational possibilities beforewhich girls and women receiverecognize the importance ofroles of women in modern

work), (2) the emergence of

22

broader employment horizons for women, and (3) the strategic valueto a young girl as well as a young boy of long-range planning andpreparation for job futures consistent with individual abilities andinterests.

Concern over population growth makes it advisable that there be moreopportunity for women to pursue worthwhile careers.

In order to help update and strengthen vocational guidance and coun-seling available for women and girls, we recommend that:

1. The Office of Education should assert leadership in upgradingthe prestige and influence of vocational guidance and counselingby providing curriculum materials, information, and technicalassistance aimed at improving and extending counseling andguidance programs in the public school system. The horizonof the disadvantaged child, both urban and rural, should bewidened beyond his or her environment, so that the child is

aware that there arc many types of work in today's economyabout which his parents and immediate associates may knowlittle.

To reinforce support of the policy of equal opportunity, theOffice of Education should give women significant representationamong its own professional and administrative staff.

2. The Office of Education should stimulate colleges to increasetheir enrollment in counseling and to offer courses for bothcounselors and :-.achers which present realistic information aboutthe multiple roles that girls will have in life, emphasizing the needfor girls to obtain adequate preparation for their probable workrole and the importance of their considering the full range ofpresent and emerging occupations for which they can chooseaccording to their interests, abilities, and temperament.

3. The Office of Education, in its support of counselor and teacherpreparation and upgrading, should encourage consideration ofthe special counseling needs of women and girls in elementaryand secondary schools as well as in institutions of higher educa-tion. Such encouragement should be directed toward enablingpresently employed counselors to update their outlook and incor-

4!)

poratc current and realistic information about women's counsclingneeds and carecr opportunities into thcir operating policies andpractices.

4. Citizcns who arc interested in improving the quality of counsclingand guidance provided womcn and girls should be made awareof the fact that Fcderal law requires that cach State Board forVocational Education hold a public hearing bcforc thc Statc'svocational cducation plan may be submitted to thc U.S. Com-missioncr of Education for approval. Conccrned individuals andorganizations should, therefore, contact the Dircctor of theirState vocational education agcncy to learn the time and place ofthe public hearing so that thcy can present their vicws regardingthe expenditure of Federal funds allotted to their State for voca-tional cducation purposcs. Thc State Commission on the Statusof Women might be the appropriate group to coordinate publicityon such hearings.

5. The Office of Education should promote programs which furtheracceptance of vocational guidance and counseling both as a pro-fcssion and as a responsibility of the total school staff. Prcscntlyemployed secondary school teachers often serve as ad hoc coun-selors to their students and should become aware of careeropportunities for womcn relating to thc subject arcas they tcach.Tcachcrs should be encouraged to integrate career developmentexperiences in their regular curriculum offerings. An importantaim is to improve the cooperation between teachers and counselorsin the counseling process.

6. The Office of Education or appropriatc State agency should con-duct or update surveys of elementary and secondary schools inthe Nation to determine how many schools and/or course offer-ings are restricted to one sex, what admission or other require-ments or circumstances discourage entry of girls or boys to classestheoretically open to them, and what positive effortsl, are beingcarried on to attract girls or boys into courses once consideredinappropriate for them.

7. The Office of Education should c:advising boys and girls and dettuscd to counsel give sufficient attcand potcntialitics of both boys agirls are encouraged to considerthosc considered appropriate to

8. Profcssional associations such asciation, thc American Personnelthe Parent - Tcachcrs Association sor to stimulatc others to financeferenccs concerning the work artwomcn's cmploymcnt status allopportunities, as alrcady is beingfcssional Women's Foundation.

9. Additional Fedcral funds shouldof Labor for strcngthening and cpublic employment offices to en,for mature womcn to be dcvel,national guidelines and a nazi.Reentry. Thc bcncfits would heand energies of mature women intforceas a result of the availahices adapted to their spccial ncpublicity to report thc existence tcmploymcnt office. A concomitat,population growth as more womtadditional children.

10. Thc State Commissions on thcmended for thcir concern and ational opportunities for womcnrecommendations will be helpfulstatus of counseling and contintStates and in stimulating action

about women's counselingcir operating policies and

the quality of counselingrls should be made awarethat each State Board forhearing before the State'somitted to the U.S. Corn-Concerned individuals andtct the Director of theirearn the time and place of.sent their views regarding

tat to their State for voca-Commission on the Statusoup to coordinate publicity

te programs which furtherI counseling both as a pro-lotal school staff. Presently)ften serve as ad hoc coun-become aware of career

le subject areas they teach.tegratc career developmentum offerings. An importantcen teachers and counselors

te State agency should eon-and secondary schools in

chools and/or course offer-admission or other requirc-ry of girls or boys to classest positive efforts are beingto courses once considered

23

7. The Office of Education should examine the testing tools used inadvising boys and girls and determine whether the tools beingused to counsel give sufficient attention to the full range of talentsand potentialities of both boys and girls and whether boys andgirls are encouraged to consider all professional fields, not onlythose considered appropriate to their sex.

8. Professional associations such as the National Education Asso-ciation, the American Personnel and Guidance Association, andthe Parent-Teachers Association should be encouraged to financeor to stimulate others to finance short -term courses and/or con-ferences concerning the work and life roles of modern women,women's employment status and problems, and employmentopportunities, as already is being done by the Business and Pro-fessional Women's Foundation.

9. Additional Federal funds should be provided to the Departmentof Labor for strengthening and expanding counseling services inpublic employment offices to enable special counseling servicesfor mature women to be developed in all local offices undernational guidelines and a national program titled OperationReentry. The benefits would be greater utilization of the talentsand energies of mature women interested in returning to the workforceas a result of the availability of special counseling serv-ices adapted to their special needs and the use of widespreadpublicity to report the existence of these services in every publicemployment office. A concomitant benefit may be a slow-down inpopulation growth as more women elect to work rather than haveadditional children.

10. The State Commissions on the Status of Women should be com-mended for their concern and activities to achieve equal educa-tional opportunities for women and girls. It is hoped that theserecommendations will be helpful to them in reviewing the currentstatus of counseling and continuingitducation in the individualStates and in stimulating action for further improvements.

1...i U.S. PRINTING OFFICE :O 1971 420.805

18

4 0

ERIC Clearinviiou:.:e

SEP1 3 1971

on Adult Education

The Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of Women whose members are appointed by the Presi-dent serve without compensation. The views expressed by the Council cannot be attributed to anyFederal agency.