I just found this alarming article

[Occhidiangela]

I'm not sure we have the same definition of "Comparative worth".  What it means here is "same pay for similar work" so for instance someone that does a three year nursing degree should (i.e. enforced by law) get the same pay as someone that does a three year compSci degree when they enter the workforce.

I can't see how that isn't a command economy:  The Govt. doesn't set the absolute price, but enforces relativity.

:P
[right][snapback]66929[/snapback][/right]

That strikes me as a load of Einsteinian eyewash, this "enforcing of relitivity." If you enforce "relativity" you are enforcing at least ONE price, eh? The price of change in one sector being required to carry over into another.

On the face of it, this seems an example of arbitrary "value" placed on time served in Académe. The government has decreed that a three year nursing degree and three year Comp Sci degree are due the same pay -- based on what, other than time served? Nurses are well paid here, particularly in locales where they are hard to keep on the work force. Comp Sci pay is somewhat determined by supply and demand for the skill and service. And actual practical talent/skill.

I will suggest that a registered nurse is 'more valuable' upon workforce entry than a comp sci major. You can major in programming, but you haven't become "a rogrammer" in the labor pool sense until you have had to make something work and completed it on time, within reasonable budget targets.

What you cite looks to me like a facet of "command economy" in action. The two fields of study are not even in the same field of endeavour. I don't see the logic, however, if it works for Kiwis in Kiwiland, Lay On MacDuff!!

I imagine there are a number of interlocking social and long term "health of the nation's workforce diversity" issues that go into such a policy. As I have said of other topics, this is certainly more than one PowerPoint briefing slide deep. :)

Occhi