Tables

Table 1
Figures
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
Table 13

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3: Descriptive Statistics

Variables	Full Sample	Men Only	Women Only
Salary Variables
Annual Salary (in dollars)[1]	$64,234	$68,636	$55,319
Annual Salary (in logarithms)[1]	11.02	11.09	10.88
Highest Degree
Percentage with doctorage degree	65%	72%	53%
Percentage with professional degree	3%	4%	3%
Percentage with other degree[2]	32%	24%	44%
Academic Rank
Percentage full professors	41%	47%	27%
Percentage associate professors	37%	34%	41%
Percentage assistant professors	21%	18%	30%
Percentage instructors	1%	1%	2%
Academic Experience
Years since highest degree [3]	21.3	22.3	19.4
Years at U of Cincinnati	15.9	16.9	13.9
Demographic Variables
Percentage female	33%	---	---
Percentage non-white	15%	16%	13%
Number of Faculty	1,328	889	439

Notes: Data include information on all faculty with regular appointments. Does not include faculty in the Medical School, with the exception of the following departments: Cell Biology, Molecular Genetics & Biochemistry, Molecular & Cellular Physiology, and Pharmacology/Cell Biology. [1] Salaries for faculty on less than 100% time appointments have been adjusted to their full-time equivalents. The salaries for faculty who are not on active status in the 1999-00 academic year have been increased by two percent. [2] Category includes faculty with missing information on highest degree. [3] When highest degree is missing, years since highest degree are defined as age minus 25. Descriptive statistics for the 113 departmental/college dummy variables are provided in the Appendix.

Table 4: Hypothesis Test for the Difference in Average Salaries for Male and Female Faculty at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Gender Average Salary Standard Deviation Number of Observations

Male Faculty $68,636 $21,360 889

Female Faculty $55,319 $15,650 439

Difference $13,317

Test for the equality of means Levene's Test for the equality of variances

Calculated t-statistic = 12.868** Calculated F-statistic = 20.574**

Degrees of freedom = 1139 Degrees of freedom = 888, 438

P-value = 0.000 P-value = 0.000

Conclusion: Reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the average salaries for men and women are different. Conclusion: Reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the population variances for men and women are different.

Notes: ** significant at the 0.01 significance level. All salaries are expressed on an FTE-equivalent basis. Since the assumption of constant variances is rejected using Levene's test, the two-sample t-test for the equality of means does not rely on the assumption of equal variances.

Table 5: Two Salary Models for Faculty at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Estimated Coefficient (t-statistics)

Variable Salary Model With Rank Salary Model Without Rank

Female -0.028** (t=3.06) -0.028* (t=2.52)

Non-white 0.009 (t=0.80) 0.008 (t=0.58)

Highest degree doctorate 0.028* (t=2.38) 0.101** (t=7.16)

Highest degree professional 0.016 (t=0.65) 0.060* (t=2.02)

Full Professor 0.354** (t=23.23) ----

Associate Professor 0.147** (t=11.98) ----

Instructor -0.115** (t=2.61) ----

Years since highest degree 0.005** (t=2.74) 0.014** (t=5.89)

Years since highest degree squared -0.00004 (t=0.79) -0.00003 (t=0.63)

Years at Cincinnati 0.003 (t=1.52) 0.016** (t=8.44)

Years at Cincinnati Squared 0.000006 (t=0.12) 0.00030** (t=5.52)

Intercept 10.605 (t=407) 10.476** (t=336)

R-squared 0.84 0.76

Notes: Sample size = 1,328. Each model also includes 112 variables for department/college affiliation. The dependent variable in both models is the log of annual salary. All salaries are converted to their FTE equivalents. **significant at the 1% level, *significant at the 5% level.

Table 6: Results from Two Logistic Regression Models Explaining Current Rank for Faculty at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Estimated Coefficient (p-values)

Dependent Variable Equals One if ...

Variable Full Professor Associate Professor

Female 0.079 (p=.722) 0.011 (t=.948)

Non-white -0.287 (p=.282) 0.246 (p=.191)

Highest degree doctorate 2.223** (p<.001) -0.400* (t=.047)

Highest degree professional 0.779 (p=.147) 0.207 (p=.628)

Years since highest degree 0.400** (p<.001) 0.023 (p=.536)

Years since highest degree squared -0.004** (p=.002) -0.002 (p=.078)

Years at Cincinnati 0.277** (p<.001) 0.174** (p<.001)

Years at Cincinnati squared -0.006** (p<.001) -0.005** (p<.001)

Intercept -11.47** (p<.001) -0.809 (p=.066)

% Cases Correctly Predicted 85.2% 72.4%

Notes: Estimated coefficients represent the effect of each variable on the log odds ratio. A positive coefficient indicates that a one-unit increase in the independent variable would lead to an increase in the probability that the faculty member holds a specific rank. **significant at the 1% level, *significant at the 5% level.

Table 7: Results from Estimating the Salary Model Separately for Male and Female Faculty at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Variable Males Only Females Only

Non-white 0.007 (t=0.53) -0.002 (t=0.12)

Highest degree doctorate 0.003 (t=1.65) 0.006 (t=0.34)

Highest degree professional 0.0008 (t=0.03) 0.066 (t=1.35)

Full Professor 0.356** (t=16.84) 0.321** (t=14.84)

Associate Professor 0.141** (t=8.13) 0.152** (t=9.35)

Instructor -0.095 (t=0.93) -0.123** (t=2.93)

Years since highest degree 0.008** (t=2.87) 0.003 (t=1.09)

Years since highest degree squared 0.00003 (t=0.43) -0.000002 (t=0.02)

Years at Cincinnati -0.001 (t=0.61) 0.003 (t=1.10)

Years at Cincinnati squared -0.00003 (t=0.44) 0.00012 (t=1.49)

Intercept 10.604** (t=320) 10.567** (t=254)

R-squared 0.82 0.88

Sample size 889 439

Notes: Each model also includes 112 variables for department/college affiliation. The dependent variable in both models is the log of annual salary. All salaries are converted to their FTE equivalents. **significant at the 1% level, *significant at the 5% level.

Table 8: Comparison of Two Alternative Methods for Measuring the Unexplained Wage Gap Between Male and Female Faculty at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Method Total Wage Gap Explained Wage Gap Unexplained Wage Gap Calculated t-statistic

Oaxaca +0.208 +0.170 +0.038 +5.71**

[82%] [18%]

Single-equation +0.208 +0.180 +0.028 +3.06**

[87%] [13%]

Notes: Total wage gap equals the difference in average log of salaries for male and female faculty. The explained wage gap equals the portion of the total wage gap that is attributed to differences in the average levels of the independent variables in the salary model for male and female faculty. The unexplained wage gap is defined as the total wage gap minus the explained wage gap. Values in square brackets show the percentages of the total wage gap that are explained and unexplained using each method. The Oaxaca method uses the coefficients from the all-male equation (Table 7, first column), while the single-equation method uses the coefficients from the pooled regression model (Table 5, first column). **significant at the 1% level.

Table 9: Hypothesis Test for the Difference in Actual Minus Predicted Log of Salaries for Male and Female Faculty in Non-Regular Positions at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Gender Average Actual Log of Salary Average Predicted Log of Salary Average Actual Minus Predicted Standard Deviation # Cases

Male Faculty 10.8782 11.1118 -0.2336 0.281 52

Female Faculty 10.7405 10.9547 -0.2141 0.242 72

Difference = 0.1377 0.1571 -0.0195

Test for the equality of means: Levene's Test for the equality of variances:

Calculated t-statistic = -0.41 Calculated F-statistic = 3.07

Degrees of freedom = 122 Degrees of freedom = 71.51

P-value = 0.682 P-value = 0.082

Conclusion: Fail to reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the average salaries for men and women are not different. Conclusion: Fail to reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the population variances for men and women are not different.

Notes: ** significant at the 0.01 significance level. P-values are for two-tailed test. All salaries are expressed on an FTE-equivalent basis. Since the assumption of constant variances is not rejected using Levene's test, the two-sample t-test for the equality of means relies on the assumption of equal variances.

Table 10: Distribution of Individual Salary Inequities for Female Faculty at the University of Cincinnati, 1999-00

Percentile Grouping	Range of Dollar Adjustments	Range of Percent Adjustments
1^st to 10^th percentile	-$21,126 to -$8,315	-29.0% to -12.3%
11^th to 20^th percentile	-$8,314 to -$-$4,786	-12.2% to -7.6%
21^st to 30^th percentile	-$4,785 to -$1,743	-7.5% to -3.0%
31^st to 40^th percentile	-1,742 to $+191	-2.9% to +0.3%
41^st to 50^th percentile	+$192 to +$1,708	+0.4% to +3.6%
51^st to 60^th percentile	+$1,709 to +$3,295	+3.7% to +6.4%
61^st to 70^th percentile	+$3,295 to +$5,183	+6.5% to +9.9%
71^st to 80^th percentile	+$5,184 to +$7,527	+10.0% to +15.3%
81^st to 90^th percentile	+$7,528 to +$11,052	+15.4% to +24.3%
91^st to 100^th percentile	+$11,053 to +$41,233	+24.4% to +61.0%

Notes: Dollar adjustments are defined as the difference between a woman's predicted salary if paid according to the all-male salary equation (Table 7, column 1) and her actual salary. Positive values indicate that a woman's salary is less than what it would be predicted to equal if she were paid as a man. The percentage adjustments are defined as the dollar adjustments divided by each woman's actual salary. All salaries are expressed in their FTE equivalents.

Back to top

Table 11: A Comparison of Annual and Cumulative Salary Inequities

Salary if Annual Cumulative

Actual Paid as Salary Salary

Year Salary a Male Inequity Inequity

1975-76 $20,000 $20,600 -$600 -$600

1976-77 $21,000 $21,630 -$630 -$1,230

1977-78 $22,050 $22,712 -$662 -$1,892

1978-79 $23,153 $23,847 -$695 -$2,586

1979-80 $24,310 $25,039 -$729 -$3,315

1980-81 $25,526 $26,291 -$766 -$4,081

1981-82 $26,802 $27,606 -$804 -$4,885

1982-83 $28,142 $28,986 -$844 -$5,729

1983-84 $29,549 $30,436 -$886 -$6,616

1984-85 $31,027 $31,957 -$931 -$7,547

1985-86 $32,578 $33,555 -$977 -$8,524

1986-87 $34,207 $35,233 -$1,026 -$9,550

1987-88 $35,917 $36,995 -$1,078 -$10,628

1988-89 $37,713 $38,844 -$1,131 -$11,759

1989-90 $39,599 $40,787 -$1,188 -$12,947

1990-91 $41,579 $42,826 -$1,247 -$14,194

1991-92 $43,657 $44,967 -$1,310 -$15,504

1992-93 $45,840 $47,216 -$1,375 -$16,879

1993-94 $48,132 $49,576 -$1,444 -$18,323

1994-95 $50,539 $52,055 -$1,516 -$19,840

1995-96 $53,066 $54,658 -$1,592 -$21,432

1996-97 $55,719 $57,391 -$1,672 -$23,103

1997-98 $58,505 $60,260 -$1,755 -$24,858

1998-99 $61,430 $63,273 -$1,843 -$26,701

1999-00 $64,502 $66,437 -$1,935 -$28,636

Notes: Salary figures are for a hypothetical individual woman with a starting salary of $20,000 in 1975-76. The simulations assume that she is underpaid by three percent per year, and that all salaries increase by 5% per year.

Table 12: History of Negotiated Salary Increases at the University of Cincinnati,

1975-76 to 1999-00

Year	Salary Increase
1999-00	9/1/99: 2% of 1998-99 salary 3/1/00: 1.5% of 12/31/99 salary
1998-99	9/1/98: $600 3/1/99: $600
1997-98	9/1/97: 1% of 1996-97 salary + 1.5% merit 3/1/98: 2.5% of 12/31/97 salary
1996-97	9/1/96: 1.5% of 1995-96 salary + 1.5% merit 3/1/97: 2% of 12/31/96 salary
1995-96	9/1/95: 2% of 1994-95 salary 3/1/96: 2% of 12/31/95 salary
1994-95	2% of 1993-94 salary + $1045
1993-94	2% of 1992-93 salary
1992-93	No salary increase
1991-92	4% of 1990-91 salary + $512
1990-91	4% of 1989-90 salary + $487
1989-90	5% of 1988-89 salary + $458
1988-89	4% of 1987-88 salary + $217 + 2% merit
1987-88	4% of 1986-87 salary + $406 + 2% merit
1986-87	4.5% of 1985-86 salary + $378 + 2% merit
1985-86	9/1/85: 4% of 1984-85 salary + $400 3/1/86: 2% merit
1984-85	9/1/84: 4% of 1983-84 salary 3/1/85: $550 + 1.5% merit
1983-84	7.75% of 1982-83 salary + 0.75% merit
1982-83	$1800
1981-82	9/1/81: 5% of 1980-81 salary + $940 1/1/82: $500 + 0.5% merit
1980-81	9/1/80: 2% of 1979-80 salary + $1030 + 0.75% merit 1/1/80: 3% of 1/1/81 salary
1979-80	9/1/79: 2% of 1978-79 salary + $940 1/1/80: 3% of 1/1/80 salary
1978-79	5% of 1977-78 salary + $300 + 0.5% merit
1977-78	4% of 1976-77 salary + $200 + 0.5% merit
1976-77	6% of 1975-76 salary + 1% merit
1975-76	$1500 + 4.8% of 1974-75 salary

1975-76 $1500 + 4.8% of 1974-75 salary

Source: AAUP chapter at the University of Cincinnati.

Table 13: Cost Calculations for Removing Current and Past Salary Inequities for Female Faculty at the University of Cincinnati

Year	Method 3(a):	Method 3(b):	Method 3(c):	Method 3(d):	Method 3(e):
1999-00	$897,509	$1,537,365	$2,238,835	$2,238,835	$2,238,835
1998-99	$858,497	$1,470,540	$494,695	$847,375	$2,111,382
1997-98	$802,049	$1,373,849	$464,620	$795,858	$1,971,505
1996-97	$735,673	$1,260,152	$430,582	$737,554	$1,827,135
1995-96	$674,483	$1,155,337	$399,984	$685,141	$1,693,803
1994-95	$618,832	$1,060,013	$371,691	$636,678	$1,579,413
1993-94	$573,215	$981,874	$344,259	$589,690	$1,452,601
1992-93	$530,708	$909,062	$311,342	$533,305	$1,347,859
1991-92	$505,138	$865,263	$299,935	$513,766	$1,296,231
1990-91	$460,021	$787,982	$277,576	$475,466	$1,218,441
1981-90	$2,548,386	$4,365,191	$1,459,587	$2,500,161	$5,960,149
1976-81	$402,202	$688,941	$216,730	$371,242	$839,541
TOTAL	$9,606,714	$16,455,569	$7,309,835	$10,925,072	$23,536,895

# women	439	439	272	272	272

Notes: Method 3(a) = each woman receives a 2.83% salary increase for each year of employment. Method 3(b) = each woman receives a 4.85% salary increase for each year of employment. Method 3(c) = each underpaid woman receives her individual salary inequity in the current year and a 2.83% salary increase for each year of employment. Method 3(d) = each underpaid woman receives her individual salary inequity in the current year and a 4.85% salary increase for each year of employment. Method 3(e) = each underpaid woman receives her current individual salary inequity for each year of employment.

Back to gender report

Gender	Average Salary	Standard Deviation	Number of Observations
Male Faculty	$68,636	$21,360	889
Female Faculty	$55,319	$15,650	439
Difference	$13,317

Test for the equality of means	Levene's Test for the equality of variances
Calculated t-statistic = 12.868**	Calculated F-statistic = 20.574**
Degrees of freedom = 1139	Degrees of freedom = 888, 438
P-value = 0.000	P-value = 0.000
Conclusion: Reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the average salaries for men and women are different.	Conclusion: Reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the population variances for men and women are different.

	Estimated Coefficient	(t-statistics)
Variable	Salary Model With Rank	Salary Model Without Rank
Female	-0.028** (t=3.06)	-0.028* (t=2.52)
Non-white	0.009 (t=0.80)	0.008 (t=0.58)
Highest degree doctorate	0.028* (t=2.38)	0.101** (t=7.16)
Highest degree professional	0.016 (t=0.65)	0.060* (t=2.02)
Full Professor	0.354** (t=23.23)	----
Associate Professor	0.147** (t=11.98)	----
Instructor	-0.115** (t=2.61)	----
Years since highest degree	0.005** (t=2.74)	0.014** (t=5.89)
Years since highest degree squared	-0.00004 (t=0.79)	-0.00003 (t=0.63)
Years at Cincinnati	0.003 (t=1.52)	0.016** (t=8.44)
Years at Cincinnati Squared	0.000006 (t=0.12)	0.00030** (t=5.52)
Intercept	10.605 (t=407)	10.476** (t=336)
R-squared	0.84	0.76

	Estimated Coefficient (p-values)
Dependent Variable Equals One if ...
Variable	Full Professor	Associate Professor
Female	0.079 (p=.722)	0.011 (t=.948)
Non-white	-0.287 (p=.282)	0.246 (p=.191)
Highest degree doctorate	2.223** (p<.001)	-0.400* (t=.047)
Highest degree professional	0.779 (p=.147)	0.207 (p=.628)
Years since highest degree	0.400** (p<.001)	0.023 (p=.536)
Years since highest degree squared	-0.004** (p=.002)	-0.002 (p=.078)
Years at Cincinnati	0.277** (p<.001)	0.174** (p<.001)
Years at Cincinnati squared	-0.006** (p<.001)	-0.005** (p<.001)
Intercept	-11.47** (p<.001)	-0.809 (p=.066)
% Cases Correctly Predicted	85.2%	72.4%

Variable	Males Only	Females Only
Non-white	0.007 (t=0.53)	-0.002 (t=0.12)
Highest degree doctorate	0.003 (t=1.65)	0.006 (t=0.34)
Highest degree professional	0.0008 (t=0.03)	0.066 (t=1.35)
Full Professor	0.356** (t=16.84)	0.321** (t=14.84)
Associate Professor	0.141** (t=8.13)	0.152** (t=9.35)
Instructor	-0.095 (t=0.93)	-0.123** (t=2.93)
Years since highest degree	0.008** (t=2.87)	0.003 (t=1.09)
Years since highest degree squared	0.00003 (t=0.43)	-0.000002 (t=0.02)
Years at Cincinnati	-0.001 (t=0.61)	0.003 (t=1.10)
Years at Cincinnati squared	-0.00003 (t=0.44)	0.00012 (t=1.49)
Intercept	10.604** (t=320)	10.567** (t=254)
R-squared	0.82	0.88
Sample size	889	439

Method	Total Wage Gap	Explained Wage Gap	Unexplained Wage Gap	Calculated t-statistic
Oaxaca	+0.208	+0.170	+0.038	+5.71**
		[82%]	[18%]
Single-equation	+0.208	+0.180	+0.028	+3.06**
		[87%]	[13%]

Gender	Average Actual Log of Salary	Average Predicted Log of Salary	Average Actual Minus Predicted	Standard Deviation	# Cases
Male Faculty	10.8782	11.1118	-0.2336	0.281	52
Female Faculty	10.7405	10.9547	-0.2141	0.242	72
Difference =	0.1377	0.1571	-0.0195

Test for the equality of means:	Levene's Test for the equality of variances:
Calculated t-statistic = -0.41	Calculated F-statistic = 3.07
Degrees of freedom = 122	Degrees of freedom = 71.51
P-value = 0.682	P-value = 0.082
Conclusion: Fail to reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the average salaries for men and women are not different.	Conclusion: Fail to reject null hypothesis; Conclude that the population variances for men and women are not different.

Table 11: A Comparison of Annual and Cumulative Salary Inequities

		Salary if	Annual	Cumulative
	Actual	Paid as	Salary	Salary
Year	Salary	a Male	Inequity	Inequity
1975-76	$20,000	$20,600	-$600	-$600
1976-77	$21,000	$21,630	-$630	-$1,230
1977-78	$22,050	$22,712	-$662	-$1,892
1978-79	$23,153	$23,847	-$695	-$2,586
1979-80	$24,310	$25,039	-$729	-$3,315
1980-81	$25,526	$26,291	-$766	-$4,081
1981-82	$26,802	$27,606	-$804	-$4,885
1982-83	$28,142	$28,986	-$844	-$5,729
1983-84	$29,549	$30,436	-$886	-$6,616
1984-85	$31,027	$31,957	-$931	-$7,547
1985-86	$32,578	$33,555	-$977	-$8,524
1986-87	$34,207	$35,233	-$1,026	-$9,550
1987-88	$35,917	$36,995	-$1,078	-$10,628
1988-89	$37,713	$38,844	-$1,131	-$11,759
1989-90	$39,599	$40,787	-$1,188	-$12,947
1990-91	$41,579	$42,826	-$1,247	-$14,194
1991-92	$43,657	$44,967	-$1,310	-$15,504
1992-93	$45,840	$47,216	-$1,375	-$16,879
1993-94	$48,132	$49,576	-$1,444	-$18,323
1994-95	$50,539	$52,055	-$1,516	-$19,840
1995-96	$53,066	$54,658	-$1,592	-$21,432
1996-97	$55,719	$57,391	-$1,672	-$23,103
1997-98	$58,505	$60,260	-$1,755	-$24,858
1998-99	$61,430	$63,273	-$1,843	-$26,701
1999-00	$64,502	$66,437	-$1,935	-$28,636
Notes: Salary figures are for a hypothetical individual woman with a starting salary of $20,000 in 1975-76. The simulations assume that she is underpaid by three percent per year, and that all salaries increase by 5% per year.