The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap

[video=youtube;jIo-EHQqSFo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIo-EHQqSFo[/video]

http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/political-correctness-stupid-dogma/how-women-can-earn-more-then-men-25-life-choices-to-get-higher-pay

Dr. Warren Farrel has a series of 25 reasons for a pay gap that are entirely independent of sexism, and - none of them have to do with sexism!

 

When I think of the 'pay gap' I am usually thinking of the difference between a man and a woman working the exact same job and who have the exact same education/experience/skills for unequal pay.

What he is looking at and comparing is something like, a thousand men and a thousand women and which groups work more or less or what kinds of jobs they mainly work in and he's viewing the pay-gap from a macro level rather than on a micro level between different genders that are working the exact same job with, again, same experience/skills/education.

 

One reason for the disparity between men and women and their incomes is a result of what they choose to study at University:

According to the study: “What’s it Worth? The Economic Value of College Majors” which analyzes data from the 2009 American Community Survey, white men are concentrated in the highest-earning majors, including engineering and pharmaceutical sciences, while women gravitate toward the lowest-earning majors like education, art and social work.

Source: http://newsone.com/1252915/college-majors-highly-segregated-by-race-and-gender/

 

[video=youtube;EwogDPh-Sow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow[/video]

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/01/cities-where-women-outearn-male-counterparts/

http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20 Report.pdf

http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/in...&File_id=2a1f8ad4-f649-4ad3-a742-268d946962db

I thought these would be interesting and relevant.

 

I look at pay gap as a result of risk factor association.


find me one risk that only applies to men, not men and women.... I have honestly tried to come up with something.


now, what about something that affects just women, but not men.... pregnancy.


the simple fact is, women in child bearing ages, are a risky investment for a company. They can spend money training her, and then bam.... she's pregnant and requires at least 6 weeks off the job after the birth. So, her workload has to either be divied out amoung her remaining coworkers (not as effecient) or they have to hire (and train) a temp. Or, if the woman leaves, they have to hire and train someone new.


all other factors... leaving the company, being fired, illness like cancer, death, are all equal risks, but pregnancy is unique to women only.




risk = $$

women are a slightly higher risk, therefore, a slightly higher cost associated with them.

 

The problem is, no one, as in no one ever, works exactly the same as another person.

Yes, equal work for equal pay, sounds nice, but there is no such thing as "equal work".

There are a massive host of differences between any two people, no matter how many other factors are "the same".

For example, two people working side by side, doing the same job. One is jerk. One is not. From the outside looking in, you would never be able to tell from the recorded factors on someone's resume, that the reason one person is paid less, is because they are a jerk.

"well attitude shouldn't matter as long as I get the job done!" oh grow up. If you hire someone to fix your air conditioning, and they treat you like a jerk, you fire their butt, and hire someone else. A company might keep that person working, but never give them a pay raise. Same difference.

That's one of dozens of factors that effect "equal work" being unequal.

Here's another one. Two people. One leaves at 3:30 every day, and never stays over. The other leaves when the job is done, and is willing to stay over whenever something must be finished. Again, from outside statistics, you would never notice this difference, yet obviously the one willing to stay over has a higher value to the company.

"But I shouldn't be penalized! I have to pick up my kids at school!" Well too bad. That's how life works. You are not paid merely based on just experience/skills/education. You are also paid based on your value to the company. They want to keep the person who is willing to stay over whenever needed, and thus they pay that person more.

Another example. Two people, working at the same company for five years. But one of them, has been gone for 12 months over three different years, because of three different pregnancies. The other has been working continuously for 5 years.

Or one person calls off every other Thursday, because little Timmy fell down at school, or got sick, or got kicked out of school for fighting.

Which person has more value to the company? Obviously the one that is always there. The one that can't work because she pregar, or disappears every other week because of Timmy, is not as valuable to the company as one who is dependable and always there. They want that person to stay, and thus they are willing to shell out more money to keep him.

Again, there are thousand of factors that all play into your value to the company. There is no such thing as two people who work completely the same. There is always someone willing to work more. Willing to go the extra mile. Willing to put up with anyone. More friendly, less friendly. Willing to travel. Willing to work weekends. Willing to put in the over time. Willing to do whatever needs done.

I remember this one guy that complained constantly that he never got a raise every year, and been there for 10 years. But every time the boss needed something done somewhere else "Not my job. I can't do that sorry. I'm not a maid, I don't clean floors".

Then he complains about equal work for equal pay? That all the other people doing the same job, got paid more? Shocking..... Can't imagine why.

The biggest issue with equal work for equal pay, is that this is going to harm women getting jobs.

If you prevent companies from offering lower wages, to less valuable employees, they won't hire less valuable employees. Instead of women getting more money, they'll get more unemployment. Government mandates never result in a benefit. They passed a law preventing gender discrimination in the Eurozone, and the result was auto insurance premiums on women all increased. Women crash less, and thus normally have a lower premium. So now women have to pay the same premiums as men who crash more often. Of course the insurance companies love government regulations.

- - - Updated - - -

All true. I had a lady tell me she had a great job when she got out of high school, making good money. But she got preggar, and quit. Then women complain they are not paid as much? Duh.... of course.

 

Well jeeze, when you put it like that it's no wonder women have abortions, most of the time probably just to save their careers.

 

Read this study.

http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/the-ten-most-common-feminist-myths/

 

I didn't say anything about women making 75 cents to the man's dollar, so this is rather irrelevant to me let alone to the highlighted portion of what I said.

When I am thinking unequal pay I most definitely think of starting wages when a person is hired. So I work in retail as a cashier, if someone else, say a male was going to get hired as a cashier along with me I'd expect us to be making exactly the same amount of starting pay.

Now if say I did a better job at it, I followed and promoted all the sales of the day and had better sales and responses from customers than my male counterpart, who say might be treating his position more lazily or isn't more enthusiastic about it, then I would expect to get a higher raise at our yearly reviews. So I'm not arguing about people who work better than others getting better pay. But when you have a man and a woman starting in the same low-level position you'd expect both to be paid the same at start (or perhaps one WILL be paid better because he or she knows how to negotiate a good starting pay).

There are certainly a lot of factors to consider here. Obviously companies will be skeptical of hiring young women, especially just married young women since they will more than likely be trying to get pregnant soon and start families. And with the prospect of a new hire suddenly taking maternity leave, that is obviously something to be concerned about. But men are also taking maternity or I suppose paternity leave now too with new arrivals in the family. Just recently my fiance's general store manager had a son and he left work for over a month to be with and support his wife and new baby.

This is a good thing, don't you think? It's rather frustrating that companies will be so biased solely towards women when as a society we should be promoting more family and taking time off to be with that family, both mothers and fathers. When both parents are involved in their kids lives that seems to make for much healthier families and thus healthier children-soon-to-be-adults.

But when you have corporations that don't care about nor consider the health and well-being of their employees families, both men and women, you start creating problems there. You're going to have more and more women choosing to have abortions instead of choosing to have their babies and have a family just to save their jobs. You might have more and more men choosing work over being home with their kids as well, or who choose not to marry or have a family at all and instead have a career.

From the way you make it sound, it's like the reason behind why so many families fall apart (or don't start at all) is because of the lack of leniency companies have towards their employees who have or are trying to have families. You make it sound like, corporations are against people having families so they can have their constant day-workers with no interruptions in their jobs, like silly things such as needy families, sick children, and pregnant women. It's a bit sad really.

But I know exactly what you mean. I am afraid that if I ever get pregnant and choose to keep it, I will lose my job, the one thing that's keeping a roof over my head, because as a pregnant woman I will be of no value to the company that hired me. This is a terrible and frustrating thing for many women who have to work to live.

 

you talk that this is something new? lack of compasion... .truth is, companies have never cared about people having families because when it was just men working, they dind't have to miss any time due to the care of the infant after the pregnancy.... now, because women are in the workplace (not a bad thing, mind ya) companies are exposed for being what they are.... profit motivated.

To be fair.... it's not the companies job to worry about your pregnancy.... they pay you to work.

 

And yet I constantly see people in this country, conservatives usually, going on and on about the traditional family being destroyed, perhaps they need to look at their beloved corporations for helping to destroy the family unit they whine about so much.

It certainly bothers me that this is how companies look at families and that they don't take that into consideration in the slightest. It's a shame really.

 

As stated by another poster, men and women in the same field, with same experience etc. make practically the same amount. It is, however, important to dispel the common myth that women make 3/4ths of what men do for the same job - that is the myth. I'm going to college, and guarantee that if you go around and ask students if women make about 3/4ths of what men do for the same job, or ask if they make 3/4ths "due to discrimination," you'll get a majority yes answers.

I think there are some areas where you would prefer a man or a woman, and there's nothing inherently wrong with it. There are areas where discrimination occurs and it's not racism or sexism, but just good business sense. While these don't always favor men, they favor men more often than women for simple biological reasons.

1) think of a moving company. You need people that are bigger and stronger than most to move heavy appliances, and even a majority of men aren't strong enough for the job, so how many women do you think will be strong enough? Some, but certainly less than men.
2) think of a logging company - again, a strength/endurance issue
3) think of customer service jobs like waiting on tables. We don't need to close our eyes to reality and pretend things aren't what they are. If your customer base is mostly women, you're usually going to want a good looking guy to wait on tables. If most of your customer base is men, you're going to want good looking women to wait on tables. It's shallow, but the appealing opposite sex brings in repeat customers.

 

It's to be expected, really. And it's what we get for trying to attack the rich guy so much that we've slowly pushed out the actually family-owned businesses in favor of corporations. Corporations exist to make money - it seems foolish to fault them for achieving, or striving to achieve, their purpose. They ought to have a lower tax rate with fewer deductibles.

 

And that's fine, but I never stated the myth. I really don't follow this topic much, let alone know all the facts surrounding it, so I really don't know all the myths either. And I haven't seen anyone here say anything about women making 3/4's of what men make.

I really have no problem with companies choosing to discriminate this way if it is better for their business. In fact, they probably already do it since they don't have to openly state why they chose not to hire someone they interviewed. That's just how it is. H(. Y .)ters ain't hiring male waiters for certain obvious reasons. lmfao

 

Which is a shame. I work in retail and all this insane obsessive consumerism is just destroying our society. People have started valuing their STUFF and their MONEY more than they value their families. Big business is feeding off of this and growing even more and shutting down all the little mom and pop shops that can't compete with the outrageous prices.

My fiance really wants to start a family owned diner, that I would love to work with him in, but with the way our society is going I just don't see it being a very feasible option anymore.

 

already established

Well it's fairly common, particularly from the young and impressionable crowds.

Pretty much, but that's probably enough to make up for that 2% difference, if you follow

 

No, that's still a feasible option. The only problem you'll face is the tax laws that favor your corporate competitors over you, but besides that you won't have issue. Restaurants are one of the few places where you can really break through. It's not like retail, where Target and Wal Mart are selling the same product and you can compare and figure out who has the better prices. At a diner, prices aren't a major concern because other diners won't have identical products. You can have your own unique products and, when they are the same, you can do it better.

The problem is that mom and pop shops try to compete in retail when they have no capacity to compete. They can't match the prices, they can't stay open for the same # of hours, they have higher labor costs (to move the same amount of product they need more labor). Small corporation chains felt the same thing.

 

You work in retail? People buying and selling is what keeps food on your table.

Buying and selling is the economy!

Nearly all restaurant start-ops fail btw. Better think it over how hard you are willing to work!

There is always a place somewhere for good food and service. If you guys really want to do it you will succeed.

Buying and selling food..

 

And I understand consumerism is necessary to fuel the economy. That's not what upsets me. What upsets me is when people value things more than human lives, to the point that people are literally trampled to death for a good deal, that's when you need to take a step back and say, wtf? Is this deal on a flat screen really worth stomping over the corpse of another human being? It's just insane.

 

Sure that is. But out of 300 million people, its hardly significant other than a news item.

I do agree tho that if things are the highest value, then that's not good for the human future.

Also, that we cant all just buy sell use up more and more, its not sustainable.

Who knows how people should best live? That's' not it, nor was the middle ages. Maybe we will never know.

As for me I have the good fortune not to have material wants, I can really have anything i wish.

But I prefer to live in a simple unpretentious way. Guess Im not good for the economy!

 

I can't believe anyone still actually believes in the pay gap myth. It's not even logical. If you can pay a woman 25% less than a man for doing the same job, then every company everywhere should be employing women exclusively. Because that would boost their profit margins by 25%. And if corporations are really as "greedy" and profit-motivated as people want to claim, then clearly they would all be doing this. But if they're willing to take a 25% profit loss just to keep women down (that's some serious sexism right there!), then you can't really argue that they're greedy. Because clearly they don't care that much about maximizing their profits.

So they're either greedy or sexist. But they can't be both. Which is it, victicrats? Pick your poison.

 

and here's an interesting thought about laws mandating equal pay:
Those laws actually take away from women their only weapon to hurt misogynist empoyers. If women were to work for less, the empoyer would have to take an economic loss if he insisted on only employing higher-payed men, but now that they're bound by law to be payed the same he faces no such penalty for being misgoynist.

 

I keep hearing a lot of wage gap B.S. lately on TV and the radio

Waaaa women are so oppressed. They tend to study subjects at University that are fun and men tend to study subjects at uni that are difficult so men are qualified for higher paying jobs when they graduate waaaa women are so oppressed they should get paid more than men for not working as hard as men waaaaa

 

I pick that some people only do binary thinking.

 

It doesnt really matter what people think if they dont put it into action.

Your waitress may think you are a low creep, but if she gives you good service,you give her a tip.

Mr. Miso. at the office will probably put his attitude into action some way, and there will be a way to take action if so.