Job study shows that pretty people make more money; ugly men make the least

Jet, April 11, 1994

Believe it or not, researchers have concluded that attractive people earn more than average looking people in the workplace.

Unfortunately, workers who are not at all attractive, earn even less.

And ugly men are affected more than ugly women. Men who are uglier than average tend to make nine percent less, while below average looking women make only five percent less.

These are the surprising revelations of Dr. Daniel Hamermesh, an economist at the University of Texas at Austin, who conducted the

"Beauty and the Labor Market" study with fellow economist Jeff Biddle of Michigan State University in East Lansing.

Their study also found that on average, people

who are perceived as "very nice looking" earn about 10 percent more than those viewed as "homely," even though in the majority of cases their education and experience levels are the same. Attractive women also experience faster salary growth.

The findings suggest that in addition to race and gender prejudice in the workplace, employees are increasingly having to deal with beauty bias.

What's more surprising is that the financial disparity is not limited to occupations where looks are certain to play a major role such as modeling and acting.

The study noted that looks also count for higher earnings in jobs where appearance presumably is not a factor - such as bricklaying, factory work and telemarketing.

For instance, 33 percent of employers contacted for the study said that looks are somewhat important in construction work. A total of 66 percent of employers said a nice appearance is somewhat important in auto mechanics.

As can be expected, 90 percent thought being attractive is important to a certain extent in retail sales, and 81 percent of employers believe good looks count in jobs as a waitress and receptionist.

The findings were based on data from three surveys - two in the U.S. and one in Canada, with a total of 7,094 respondents ages 18 through 64, Hamermesh said.

In the study, interviewers conducting the surveys were asked to rate respondents to the surveys on a five-point scale of physical appearance ranging from strikingly handsome or beautiful to homely.

Respondents were then asked questions about their occupations and wages. The survey also included interviews with employers.

So how exactly does one explain the beauty differential?

"Our best guess is that it's a matter of pure discrimination," Hamermesh told JET.

"No matter what the occupation, the good-looking people are making more and the bad-looking people are making less."

The economist said there's no evidence that Blacks are affected moreso than Whites or vice-versa.

"It's hard to draw the lines racially because only 10 to 12 percent of our respondents are African-American," Hamermesh explained. "From what we can tell though, it does not appear that the disparities have anything to do with race."

Possible explanations for the wage bias that were listed in the study included:

* Employer discrimination. Some employers just don't like to hire unattractive people.

* Customer discrimination. In

general, customers Prefer to deal with nice looking people, making them more valuable to employers.

* Productivity. The study found that better looking people may truly be more productive in some lines of work. It noted, for instance, that attractiveness may lead to greater poise or self-confidence, leadership ability and other assets valued in the labor market.

The study showed, too, that below, average 100king women are less likely to participate in the labor force. However this is not true of bad looking men.

"Ugly men work in spite of the pay difference. They usually don't have much of a choice," Hamermesh stated.

The research concluded that the husband's of homely looking women tend to be less educated and earn less than the husband's of average or pretty women.