Leveling The Playing Field

It was March 1993 and the women coaches at the University felt it was time to take action. "I think the women coaches have a number of issues they have been dealing with individually in their programs," Penn Senior Associate Athletic Director Carolyn Schlie-Femovich said. "[They] collectively got together and sent us a really clear message about what they felt was important. Definitely, salary equity was top on their list. They wanted to make sure they were compensated in an equitable fashion." Schlie-Femovich said, however, they did not threaten to sue. "I hope it wouldn't get to that point," she said. "But I think they're keeping our feet to the fire to make sure that we're moving as quickly as possible." Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 requires equal opportunities for the under-represented sex in academic programs with federal funding, which predominantly applies to women. "You achieve gender equity when the coach or athlete in one program would gladly trade places with a coach or athlete in a comparable other-sex program," Schlie-Femovich said. "So if it's a male tennis player, he would gladly trade places with a women's tennis player. If it's a female soccer player, she would trade places with a male soccer player." Taken word for word from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but limited to education, Section 901 of Title IX reads: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." Litigation concerning women's intercollegiate athletics based on Title IX began in the late 1970s with little success. Athletic Departments successfully argued that because they do not directly get federal funding, the law should not apply to them. But after the Civil Rights Act of 1987, the courts took an institutional approach, ruling that all programs or activities within a university receiving Federal funds, regardless of whether or not the individual department directly receives those funds, comes under the jurisdiction of Title IX. The result has been a glut of cases springing up throughout the nation, with many universities settling disputes out of court. In May 1991, Brown University decided to drop its women's gymnastics and volleyball programs, along with men's golf and water polo. In April 1992, the two women's teams filed a class-action lawsuit, alleging gender discrimination in violation of Title IX. Brown decided to engage in a costly legal battle. In December, Senior U.S. District Judge Raymond J. Pettine issued a preliminary injunction, ordering Brown to re-establish the two teams and not cut any other women's squads. Brown appealed, but the First Circuit court agreed with the ruling. The case will go to trial next month. Cornell University took the opposite approach, reinstating its women's gymnastics and fencing teams rather than spending a fortune in legal costs to defend itself against gender-based discrimination claims. The two cases, as well as many others, deal primarily with participation rates, defined as the male-to-female ratio of athletes compared to the percentage of men and women in the university's general population. At Penn, 57 percent of the student body is male and 43 percent female, while athletes are 68 percent male and 32 percent female. Of the 30 varsity sports, 16 are for men, 14 for women. The 11-percent disparity between the University as a whole and the athletic teams in itself is not a violation of Title IX. As long as the University shows growth in women's participation and a willingness to grant new teams to women displaying a genuine interest, the University is in compliance, Schlie-Femovich said. That was the case two years ago when women's soccer was promoted from club status to a varsity sport. Last month, the head coaching position, which had been part-time, was made full-time. "In women's soccer we had a demonstrated interest by the athletes," Schlie-Femovich said. "Over a period of years as a club program they showed their interest and commitment. We heard through admissions there was a lot of inquiry about women's soccer. We ultimately added it. By law, that's something we should have done." She added that if a university has shown a history of willingness to cooperate in making participation rate more reflective of the university's population, then they are in compliance with Title IX. "We're not equal on our numbers here at Penn, but we've shown that history, and we're certainly not turning anybody away," Schlie-Femovich said. Title IX also protects a women's team from being cut if the participation rate in all athletics for women is less than the percentage of women students at the university. "Because Cornell had fewer women's participation opportunities on the whole than they had for men, they agreed to put them back before it came to court," Schlie-Femovich said. "Brown went to court where they lost the case involving gymnastics, and then was told they had to restore the program. It's still being appealed, interestingly enough. That's why the participation opportunity seems to be a big catch point right now, a very hot topic." The hot topic at the University is salary equity, which is based on Title VII. As in any other workplace, many women coaches are concerned that their salaries may not be at the same level as their male counterparts -- even though they feel they perform the same work. Schlie-Femovich said the University is addressing the inequity issue. "We're in the midst of a thorough compensation review, addressing all of our full-time coaching positions to make sure that we have a system [which is] fair and equitable," she said. One setback in gender equity involving salaries occurred in January, when a federal appeals court refused to hear the sex discrimination case against former Penn women's basketball coach Marianne Stanley. Stanley sued the University of Southern California because the salary offered by USC Athletic Director Mike Garrett was below that of men's coach George Raveling. Stanley had a higher winning percentage than Raveling, but Raveling was being paid more and had several perks in addition to his base salary. Judge Arthur Alarcon ruled in favor of USC, citing "significant differences in job pressure, the level of responsibility, and in marketing and revenue-producing qualifications and performance." The ruling left many outraged. Penn women's basketball coach Julie Soriero said if expected revenue or fan attendance figures are not spelled out in the coaches' contracts, then they should be paid equal pay for equal work. "As a women's basketball coach, there is a reality out there that says we don't generate a billion dollars from our NCAA tournament, but then that should be a very clearly defined job expectation for men," she said. "If there's no actual spelled-out difference then they're doing the exact same work, [and] there shouldn't be a difference in their salaries." In addition to program cuts and salary disputes, scholarships and the disproportionate amount of spending on men have received a great deal of attention. But while those issues have received the bulk of the attention, coaches at the University and across the nation are fighting for other, less-obvious things as well. "[We] looked at things, like how we handled equipment, how we assigned fields, access to weight rooms, how trainers get assigned, secretarial support, and have been working on addressing a number of those issues to put us more in line with where we think we need to be," Schlie-Femovich said. She added that the Athletic Department has identified a special pool of dollars for women coaches to draw from for special recruiting needs if their dollars are not sufficient for their program. "There are some inequities that exist at Penn and I think the administration has made some attempt to examine them and in some cases to rectify them," Soriero said. "There are still inequities that exist, and there's probably still things that need to be changed." Schlie-Femovich said achieving gender equity is a difficult and complicated issue that is continually evolving. "Gender equity is something you're always working on and striving toward because we're in a very dynamic environment where things change constantly," Schlie-Femovich said. "I think we are certainly doing the right things to move us in the right direction."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.