The vast literature on the subject of the male-female wage differential has shown that despite dramatic structural and behavioral changes in the labor supply of women, a sizeable wage differential exists [19; 2; 9; 6; 4]. O'Neill [16, S92] finds that a sex differential of about 40% as measured by full-time annual earnings has persisted in the U.S. for the last four decades. But while few doubt the existence of the wage gap, there is considerable controversy regarding the role of the factors explaining the gap. The conventional approach of economists has been to estimate earnings as a function of various socio-economic characteristics.' The observed wage gap is decomposed into a part explained by productivity related factors and an unexplained residual, traditionally labelled as discrimination. While it is possible that the unexplained variation in earnings is the result of discrimination, it is also possibly the result of model misspecification.2 In this present paper, we address the misspecification that could possibly arise from omitted variables, endogeneity and sample selection. While these issues have been considered in the context of women's labor supply functions, they have largely been ignored in studies on the wage differential [12; 13]. We approach the problem of omitted variables by formulating a Fixed Effects model. In this way, productivity related factors that are difficult to measure or have unsuitable proxies are netted out from the earnings equation. Furthermore, some of the variables that are used to explain wages are themselves the outcome of discrimination. In particular, the labor market experience of a woman is dependent on her wages earned. Here, we address the endogeneity that such a cause and effect relationship may bring about. A third difficulty arises because a typical sample of working women is a non-random selection of the female labor force giving rise to the problem of sample selection bias. Heckman's [12, 213-17] procedure is used to formulate a sample selection model of earnings. The organization of this paper proceeds as follows: Section II begins with the traditional model of earnings and then develops an extended model which consolidates the issues of omitted variables, endogeneity and sample selection. Section III contains the empirical results of the