In this paper we analyze a number of assumptions and conceptual issues that arise in applications of conventional job evaluations, which are used in order to implement the principle “Equal Pay for Jobs of Equal Value” according to the Equal Pay Acts.
The main findings of the analysis can be summarized as follows: 1) A lack of a distinction between subjective and objective criteria as well as between descriptive and evaluative criteria, 2) A defective interpretation of independency conditions that are necessary in order to represent evaluation of jobs by weighted sums of scores, 3) An incorrect diagnosis and subsequently incorrect remedies of defects in job evaluation methods, 4) An incorrect interpretation of the meaning of key concepts such as “Jobs of Equal Value”, 5) Unwarranted assumptions about formal features of relations defined by the concept “Jobs of Equal Value”.