SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Yann Giraud <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 13 Dec 2021 16:38:11 +0100
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (2031 bytes) , text/html (2327 bytes)
Dear list-subscribers,
the next session of the "History of Ideas and History of Knowledge
Seminar", organized by the Agora Research Center at CY Cergy Paris
University will be held online on 16 December 2021, 2.30 to 4 pm (UTC+1).
Cléo Chassonnery-Zaïgouche (University of Cambridge, CRASSH) will present
her paper “Contested Rational Decisions. Economic Expertise in the
Comparable Worth Controversy, 1979-1989.”
Abstract: The “comparable worth” principle – a call for a general
readjustment of wages according to a measure of the worth of an occupation
– gained a policy momentum in the United States in the early 1980s. A
Supreme Court decision, multiple bills, congressional hearings as well as
an arsenal of initiatives from women and labor groups all over the US
shaped the debate as a technical as well as political issue. At the core of
the quarrel lie diverse opinions on the criteria and practices of setting
fair wages. Between 1979, the start of a national movement, and 1985, when
all US government agencies declared the principle unsound, this paper
follows the deployment of economic arguments on both sides of the
controversy. The main shifts in the dominant position are the location of
biases affecting pay settings and the criteria for rational wage
determination: from the market to job analysts for the bias, and from
bureaucratic procedures to market for the locus of rationality. I am
documenting this shift using the discussions on scientific evidence brought
by experts in legal and political hearings. The paper describes three
moments in the relations between science and policy: first the
scientisation of policy, the politicisation of science and finally, its
weaponisation.
You'll find the Zoom link to join us on the Seminar's web page:
https://heritages.cyu.fr/version-francaise/partenaires/seminaire-2021-2022-dagora
We look forward to "seeing" you there.
Yann  G., on behalf of the organizers,
Emmanuelle De Champs, Yann Giraud, Catherine Marshall and Lissell Quiroz


ATOM RSS1 RSS2