4 of 9
4
Equal pay
Posted: 12 April 2014 09:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04

Honestly, I am more concerned with the exploitation of low paid workers, than I am with the exploitation of women workers.  (Mainly because I believe it would be good for the overall economy for low paid workers to be paid more.)  But in Texas, and probably other places, women are, also, over-represented in the class of folks who are exploited by getting minimum wage or less.  In Texas, there are twice as many female vs. male hourly workers who make minimum wage or less.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 09:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
George - 12 April 2014 06:58 AM

Why should we get paid the same? In our studio the younger girls make as much as I used to when I was their age. Women my age, however, who have young children, have a very difficult time to stay late or work on the weekends. Why should my boss pay them as much as she pays me since they work less? And the reason why I can work more is because my wife works less (and makes less money than I do) and takes care of our children. Anything else, and you get communism.

The reason they have a hard time working late and on weekens is that they always get stuck taking care of kids. Young fathers have the same obligations but they usually manage to sidestep them in favor of working.

Besides that, surely not every young woman in your company has young kids to take care of. Are they also getting paid more than the young mothers? Incidentally, many men also take time off for family activities.

Base pay for the same job should be the same for men and women, no matter what their circumstances.

Statistics show that even single women who are invested in their jobs get paid less than men.

There was an old saying that is as true to day as it was in the past. Equal opportunity doesn’t mean women executives being paid as much as male executives.  It’s when a female schlemiel gets paid as much as a male schlemiel.

So far the male schlemiels get more just for being male.

Lois

[ Edited: 12 April 2014 10:42 PM by Lois ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 09:22 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04

I had to look up “schlemiel”.  Is that Yiddish?

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 09:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
TimB - 12 April 2014 09:10 AM

Honestly, I am more concerned with the exploitation of low paid workers, than I am with the exploitation of women workers.  (Mainly because I believe it would be good for the overall economy for low paid workers to be paid more.)  But in Texas, and probably other places, women are, also, over-represented in the class of folks who are exploited by getting minimum wage or less.  In Texas, there are twice as many female vs. male hourly workers who make minimum wage or less.

That is probably an effect of male entry level workers being paid more than the minimum wage for the same jobs women get minimum wage for.  If someone is paid even 25 cents an hour over minimum wage, he is no longer a minimum wage worker. He is also more likely to get a heftier raise than his female counterpart—taking him out of the minimum wage category if he was in it to begin with. Sex based wage inequality is insidious. It starts at entry level and multiplies for years. Most women never catch up.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 09:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04

It is Yiddish.  I didn’t have the benefit of that old saying, in my culture.  I had to figure out all this stuff on my own.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 09:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
TimB - 12 April 2014 09:22 AM

I had to look up “schlemiel”.  Is that Yiddish?


Yes. I’m not Jewish but I grew up and lived in or near Jewish neighborhoods most of my life. The saying came out of New York City. Sometimes nothing else has the juiciness of a Yiddish word.

Lois

[ Edited: 12 April 2014 09:47 AM by Lois ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 11:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

I’d just as soon not get involved to any extent in this discussion but, quoting George:

In our studio the younger girls make as much as I used to when I was their age.

  Not really applicable, George unless you factor in the inflation increases ever since you were young.  For example, when I hired into Douglas Aircraft in 1952 as a night time technician while I was at UCLA during the day, I started at $1.43 an hour.  Using that reasoning, women technicians today are extremely well paid if they are making $7.00 an hour.  LOL 

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 11:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04
Occam. - 12 April 2014 11:42 AM

I’d just as soon not get involved to any extent in this discussion but, quoting George:

In our studio the younger girls make as much as I used to when I was their age.

  Not really applicable, George unless you factor in the inflation increases ever since you were young.  For example, when I hired into Douglas Aircraft in 1952 as a night time technician while I was at UCLA during the day, I started at $1.43 an hour.  Using that reasoning, women technicians today are extremely well paid if they are making $7.00 an hour.  LOL 

Occam

Yeah, I thought of that, but there were so many trash talking points that I didn’t get to all of them.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 12:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2232
Joined  2007-04-26
George - 12 April 2014 07:10 AM

Another think worth thinking about is why self-employed women make less than self-employed men. Are they punishing themselves for being women like white people punish themselves for being white?  grin

Again you need to back up your comments with data which you have repeatedly failed to do.

Assuming this is even true, the problem is not so simple as you would like to have everyone believe. The issue of women being paid less is most likely multifactorial. Yes, on average women may tend to work fewer hours and take more leave than men do, but you can’t apply such generalizations to individuals when you are considering them for a promotion or a pay increase. Its clear that women are also victims of discrimination from supervisors who believe that all women are therefor less committed to their job, care less about what they get paid, or don’t need the money as much as a man. These two different issues contribute to differences when you look at gross pay of women vs men. To deny that they are not both influencing income is just beyond reason and if we can’t agree on that then there is no basis for a conversation here. The question is how much does each factor into the total discrepancy that we see.

Various studies ( such as the physician study I quoted earlier) have looked into this and tried to correct for the differences in work schedules and time off. While it impossible to totally correct for these things these studies almost invariably still show a large pay differential after correcting for time off and hours worked.

The real conundrum is whether we can find a way to correct this without instituting quotas that merely replace private discrimination against one group with legislative discrimination against another ultimately leading to resentment and animosity and a system that may be even more unfair.
.

[ Edited: 12 April 2014 12:40 PM by macgyver ]
 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 01:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 55 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3330
Joined  2011-11-04
macgyver - 12 April 2014 12:38 PM

...Various studies ( such as the physician study I quoted earlier) have looked into this and tried to correct for the differences in work schedules and time off. While it impossible to totally correct for these things these studies almost invariably still show a large pay differential after correcting for time off and hours worked.

The real conundrum is whether we can find a way to correct this without instituting quotas that merely replace private discrimination against one group with legislative discrimination against another ultimately leading to resentment and animosity and a system that may be even more unfair.
.

The Paycheck Fairness Act is not about instituting quotas: It is about—(from Wikipedia)

“making wages more transparent”;
“requiring that employers prove that wage discrepancies are tied to legitimate business qualifications and not gender”;
and “prohibiting companies from taking retaliatory action against employees who raise concerns about gender-based wage discrimination.”

This law is needed because the current Equal Pay Act doesn’t function to actually protect women from discriminatory pay practices, because Employers have found legal ways (in court cases) to get around abiding by the spirit of the Equal Pay Act.  Hence, the on-going pay discrepancies for women.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 01:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 56 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
macgyver - 12 April 2014 12:38 PM

Again you need to back up your comments with data which you have repeatedly failed to do.

It’s in the PDF I linked to earlier. It is you and the rest of the those who claim that employers discriminate against women just because they are women who need to back it back with evidence. Your study where the participants self report their numbers and where women are represented twice as much as men doesn’t prove anything.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 01:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 57 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Occam. - 12 April 2014 11:42 AM

I’d just as soon not get involved to any extent in this discussion but, quoting George:

In our studio the younger girls make as much as I used to when I was their age.

  Not really applicable, George unless you factor in the inflation increases ever since you were young.  For example, when I hired into Douglas Aircraft in 1952 as a night time technician while I was at UCLA during the day, I started at $1.43 an hour.  Using that reasoning, women technicians today are extremely well paid if they are making $7.00 an hour.  LOL 

Occam

I did take that into consideration.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 01:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 58 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2715
Joined  2011-04-24
George - 12 April 2014 07:54 AM

But not worry, the low fertility of feminists an other Leftoids won’t allow them to do damage for much longer.

Yup. grin

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 02:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 59 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2715
Joined  2011-04-24
TimB - 11 April 2014 06:20 PM


Also, you would need to explain how it is fair that being married and having children means women should earn less than men who are married and have children.  An obvious answer (for the # of children) would be that women choose to be their children’s primary caregivers (and have less time, therefore, to be in the paid workforce).  But to what degree are they making this choice, simply because men most often abdicate a role of primary caregiver, thus leaving little actual choice to women? 

The biological difference argument only goes so far.  Women produce milk that is good for developing human babies.  But beyond this biologically ordained early developmental role, there is nothing, that I am aware of, that biologically makes men inferior as potential primary caregivers of their children.

Lets make it plain. Women are compelled by their estrogen to be nurturers to babies and small children - this means they want to stay and bond with them.

Men are not biochemically suited for this behavior. Unless of course they’re effeminate men, which means their women will leave them soon.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2014 02:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 60 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
mid atlantic - 12 April 2014 01:57 PM
George - 12 April 2014 07:54 AM

But not worry, the low fertility of feminists an other Leftoids won’t allow them to do damage for much longer.

Yup. grin

It’s actually kinda sad. We’ll never have the Star Trek universe, or Marx’s society of workers, or Jesus’s heaven on Earth, because we can either be primitive and have babies, or spend most of our fertile time getting PhDs and listening to Jazz.

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 9
4
 
‹‹ US gun deaths      The Wealth Divide. ››