2016 Pay Equity Study Results: Law

Ladder Rank Salary Data

The salary data for all Ladder Rank Faculty in the School of Law are plotted below.
As a function of rank, step, and gender:

law-rank-step-gender  
As a function of rank, step, and ethnicity:

law-rank-step-ethnicity

Multiple Linear Regression Analysis

Multiple regression analysis of salary vs rank/step. As indicated in Table 1, the simplest model with only demographic variables shows women earn salaries that are 1% lower, Asian and URM faculty earn 48% and 30% less, respectively, compared to their colleagues who are white and male. Twenty-six percent of salary variation is explained by this model. As control factors are added to the model, salary differences change with women earning 13% less, Asian faculty earn 10% less, and URM faculty earn 2% less, compared to white male faculty. The percentage of salary variation explained by the model increases to 83%.

Progression Analysis

The progression data for all Law Ladder Rank Faculty, are plotted below.  Normative progression is defined in the Progression Matrix.

Progress by gender:

law-progress-by-salary-and-gender
Progress by ethnicity:

law-progress-by-salary-and-ethnicity

Progress Rate Analysis

The results indicate there isn’t a statistically significant difference in progression rate means by either gender or ethnicity when compared to white male faculty, indicating there is no evidence of biases against promotion. Normative progression is defined in the Progression Matrix.

Comments are closed