Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Industry and Health Care ((SSIND,volume 8))

  • 49 Accesses

Abstract

Recent judicial and regulatory developments have made it very clear that sex status alone cannot serve as a basis for treating women workers differently from their male counterparts. While rigid enforcement of sex discrimination laws on an individual basis is required, employers are often confused about whether civil rights laws allow them to make any distinctions between men and women on a group basis. A case in point concerns the ability of employers to differentiate between males and females in planning and administering employee pension retirement plans. This is an issue because, statistically, women as a group outlive men. The legal issue the mortality differential raises is whether an employer who treats women workers differently from their male counterparts for retirement plan purposes is guilty of sex discrimination. It is the purpose of this chapter to explore the legality of sex differentials in retirement plans as a vehicle for illustrating broader issues of workplace sex discrimination.*

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Hankley, Thomas. “Title VII Employee Retirement Plans: Unequal Contribution Requirements as Constituting Unlawful Discrimination on the Basis of Sex.” 11 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 223, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, Leo. “Do Equal Rights Mean Equal Contributions.” Pension World 18 (Nov. 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  • Huebner, S., and Black, K. Life Insurance, 5th ed. ( Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1958 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaltenborn, Sara. The Pension Game: The American Pension System from the Viewpoint of the Average Woman, Report of the Task Force on Sex Discrimination. Civil Rights Division, U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavitzenheiser, Barbara. “Sex and Single Table: Equal Monthly Retirement Income for the Sexes?” Employee Benefits Journal 2 (Fall 1976 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Note, “Sex Discrimination and Sex-Based Mortality Tables.” 53 Boston University Law Review 624, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Dianne. “Equal Protection, Title VII, and Sex-Based Mortality Tables.” 13 Tulsa Law Journal 338, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1980 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Blum, J.D. (1980). Sex Discrimination in Group Pensions. In: Walsh, D.C., Egdahl, R.H. (eds) Women, Work, and Health: Challenges to Corporate Policy. Industry and Health Care, vol 8. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8077-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8077-1_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-90478-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-8077-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics