The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

The sun in all its glqry has finally showed its face. It is unfortunate. however, that scientists have us scared of staying out in the glory for any great length of time. Exposure to the sun can cause cancer. In North America alone, over 600,000 people get skin cancer each year. The incidence of one potent form of malignant melanoma has increased 10 times in just the past 20 years, Showing its presence initially in a mole, the cancer spreads to other bodily organs such as the liver and the brain. Of the 20,000 people who contract this cancer, almost half die as a result. If we cannot raise our faces to the skies for any length of time, how then do we get that wonderfully tanned healthy look? From suntanning lamps? Certainly not! I was pleasantly surprised one morn- ing recently when a letter arrived from Derek Tangye in Cornwall. England. My wife brought it upstairs and propped it up where I could see it, while I finished dressing. Mr. Tangye and his wife Jeannie have lived in a little cottage on the Cornish cliffs near Penzance, for many years now, because they had the courage to get their priorities straight. Mr. Tangye gave up a career in military intelligence. And his wife, Jean Nicol Tangye, left a glamorous job as public relations chief for the famous Savoy Hotel chain. They turned their backs on the glitter of London, and they went to Cornwall to grow flowers, write books,' and enjoy their lives together. The United States Cancer Founda- tion has formulated studies showing that each time someone lies under the ultraviolet rays of artificial light, they are increasing their risk of suffering severe medical conditions, including skin cancer. Tanning is our body's means of protection from the ultraviolet rays of the sun. which are noticeably stronger between the hours of ll a.m. and 3 pm. Why then do people lie under ultraviolet rays our body tries to protect us from? A Artificial sources of radiation can have an "emission spectra," an angle of incidence not found in the sun's rays. This produces a higher level of penetration of the body. This results in at least 2,000 patients having to be treated in emergency wards in Cana- dian hospitals yearly, suffering from sunlamp burns and eye damage. She wrote several books - "Meet Me at the Savoy", "Hotel Regina" and "Home is the Hotel" - and did illustrations for her husband's books, the famous Minack Chronicles. In them, he writes of life with Jeannie, their cats, the vicissitudes of commercial flower gardening, the Cornish out-of-doors, their friends and assorted livestock and wild life. It was in the Minack Chron- icles, which my wife and I came across accidentally about a year ago, that we found the courage to take two little Siamese kittens into our lives to fill the gap left by an old fellow who had lived to be IT. The tiurns come as 5 result of falling asleep under a lamp, not wearing I was thinking of ali'of that the other morning as I looked forward to reading Derek Tangye's letter. But the letter contained sad news. His beloved wife Jeannie had died on February the 22nd. Mr. Tangye wanted me to do two things. He wanted me to inform an old Guest column Fitness Forum Peter Trueman Kathy Hammond Fitness instructor protective gogles and lying too close to the lamp. These reactions are physi- cal and can be treated. Other reac- tions, not as noticeable, which result from the same conditions are prema- ture aging of the skin, adverse reac- tions to medicines, soaps and per- fumes, the reduction orthe body's immune system, cancers and eye cat- aracts. Rather than spend money dosing yourself with radiation, there is a way of obtaining a healthy glow from the sun itself, without worrying about cancer. While outdoors, make it a habit to use a sunscreen, designed to cut down on the penetration of the ultraviolet rays. This time of year is most important as our winter hides tend to forget the power of the sun. Sunscreens are particularly impor- tant to people who have red or blonde hair, freckles and blue eyes who have smaller amounts of melanin in their Lar, Which is used to darken the skin as its protective measure from the ultraviolet rays. - If you have fair skin and never tan you should use a sunscreen protector numbering 15. This means it will take 15 times longer to burn than when using no protective agent. If you sometimes burn and never tan use a 6 to 8; if you occasionally burn and always tan use a 4 to 8; if you always tan and never burn, be cautious still and use a 2 to 4 screen. - There is a disadvantage to using sunscreens on warm to hot days while exercising outside. The sunscreen raises the skin's temperature by slowing evaporation. Evaporation is needed to release body heat. It would be better to bypass the sunscreen and cover up with light protective cloth- mg. Manchester newspaper friend here in Canada of his wife's death. And he wanted me to tell their many Canadian friends and readers that there would be an unusual memorial service for Jean- nie on Sunday, March the 23rd. All those who knew her, either personally, through her books, or through her husband's, were asked to remember her sometime during the day, and as a mental setting for this memorial trib- ute, were asked to conjure up the Cornish daffodil fields of Minack, which she loved so much. A Siamese cat wound itself around my ankle as I finished reading, and I knew I would honor both requests. Mr. Tangye enclosed a clipping from a Cornish newspaper about the funeral service. One of their friends and neighbours, David Cornwell, better known as author John le Carre, paid her a unique tribute. "All her life," Mr. Cornwell said, "Jeannie wore an un- mistakable, almost Churchillian air of a beautiful well-bred English girl who was ready at any time to hop into a siren suit and do a perfectly filthy job. "All her life, she remained ready to roll up her sleeves for her friends, who included the animals for whom she had a magic touch, and the countless readers, fans and odd bodies for whom she always had the time." The world is too small and there are too few of us living in it for the loss of Jean Nicol Tangye to be taken lightly. My wife and I never met her, but her spirit touched our lives, and we can ill afford to lose her. We remembered on March the 23rd. l have been following the current debate on pay equity with a good deal of interest, but judging by what I've read, I think this must be one of the most misunderstood of all the policies put forward to improve the status of women. The idea that women should receive equal pay for doing work that has the same value as men, even when the jobs they do are not the same, sounds complicated. It is perhaps not surpris- ing that people have a lot of questions about the concept and some concerns about implementing it. I think it's important to address those concerns. Why do we need pay equity? Most people are familiar with the idea of equal pay for equal work - where women and men are doing the same job, they should be paid the same wage. We've had laws to provide for this in most jurisdictions in Canada for 25 or 30 years. Most women in our work force, however, don't do the same kind of jobs as men. They work in clerical, sales and service jobs, where almost all the workers are women. Jobs like these traditionally done by women, have generally been paid at much lower rates than jobs traditionally done by men. The parking lot attendant, who is a man, gets paid more than the typist. who is a woman. There are historical reasons for this occupational segregation of women into low-paying job ghettos. As women went to work outside the home, early in this. century, only certain kinds of jobs were deemed suitable for them. Women's jobs in the work force closely paralleled what they had been expected to do in the home - helping and support occupations. Many jobs were thought of as "men's work", even though there was no logical reason why women couldn't do the work just as well. We found that out in wartime when women took over all kinds of "men's jobs" while the men were away at war. They received official blessing for doing so, and indeed we encouraged women to believe it was their patriotic duty to go out and work at the jobs that we had previously thought only men could do. Once the war was over, the men returned, wanting their jobs back, and women either had to go back home again, or return to the kind of tradition- al women's work they had been doing before. Society's perceptions about women's role in society also influenced the value put on those jobs. Jobs done by men were paid more, largely because it was assumed that a man had a wife and family to support, but a woman didn't. Since women were doing helping, car- ing and support work in the home without pay, when they entered the work force and worked at the same kind of support occupations, society did not put a very high value on their contribu- tion. Those perceptions about women's role and women's work are still very strong in our society, even though so much has changed. For instance, only about 24 per cent of all Canadian families are now supported by the earnings of the husband alone. Many women in the work force are single women who must support themselves, or they are single parents supporting dependents. Our data show how impor- tant the contribution of women working outside the home is to family income. Many more of our two-parent families would fall below the poverty line if wives as well as husbands were not in the work force. Yet because women are still confined to a limited number of low-paying job ghettos, the gap between the average earnings of women and men is almost as great now as it was 50 years ago. Even a woman with a university degree and a fulltime job earns only 72 per cent of what a man with the same education earns. Where did the Idea come from? Because most women don't perform the same kinds of jobs as men, pressure grew for legislation that would say not only that women should get paid the WATERLOO CHROMCLE, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, i966 - PAGE r I Walter McLean (P.C., Waterloo) same as men when they were doing the same job, but that they should be paid the same when they were doing a job that had the same value to the employer as one done by a man. Many people might be surprised to learn that this is not a new idea dreamed up by the modern-day women's movement. The principle of "equal pay for work of equal yalut" was put forward in a resolution of the International Labour Organization (a United Nations body in Geneva) more than 40 years ago. And the lLO's convention 100 on the subject came into force in 1953. In ratifying that conven- tion in 1972, Canada committed itself to implement equal pay for work of equal value (or pay equity, as it is often called) in all its jurisdictions. Pay equity came into force in the federal jurisdiction as part of the Canadian Human Rights Act in 1977. Quebec and Manitoba have also implemented it, and Ontario is about to do so, In the United States, 15 states have already implemented pay equity and another 15 are studying the possibility of enacting pay equity laws. Equal pay for work of equal value has also been implemented in Australia, in the United Kingdom and in other countries too. so we have plenty of experience to draw on. How would it work? Comparing two different kinds of jobs to determine what they should be paid may seem like comparing apples and oranges. In fact, it's not that difficult. Many employers have job evaluation systems that they use to set wages, Different jobs are given a certain number of points depending on what kind of education is needed to do the job, what sort of responsibility is involved, what the working conditions are like, what kind of skills are required - perhaps people skills, problem solv- ing ability, and so on. Then, based on the number of points, a wage is assigned to the job. Pay equity works in just the same way. Under the Canadian Human Rights Act, for instance. em- ployers must use a composite of the skill, effort and responsibility reqired in the performance of the work and the conditions under which the ,work is per- formed. In the past, even where a "male job" and a "female job" came out with the same number of points, they were often not paid the same. Minnesota's Council on the Economic Status of Women. for instance. in 1981 found that the male- dominated job of delivery van driver and the female-dominated job of clerk typist each received 117 points on a local government's job evaluation scale. The van driver, however, was paid $250 a month more than the clerk. Under that state's pay equity laws, jobs given the same number of points in an evaluation system would have to be given the same basic pay. Differences would be allowed, of course, where one worker had been doing the job for a longer period of time and so had moved up the pay scale as a result of his or her experience. It must be pointed out here that wage evaluations are made within one company. Pay equity legislation does not seek to compare work per- formed by a person in company X with work performed by another in company What are the problems? Even though pay equity has been implemented successfully in many ju- risdictions in Canada and elsewhere, there are still many people who are not convinced it would work for Canada. Their reservations about the policy, however, may sometimes be based on lack of information or even misunder- standing about how pay equity works. Here are some of the common criti- cisms: CRITIClSM Stl: Pay equity interferes with market forces - Many people feel uneasy at the prospect of tampering with so called "market forces", be cause they believe market forces to be neutral and fair, As we have seen in the above examples, however. "market forces" have consistently undervalued (Continued on page 12)