saemo Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 6 hours ago, Teancum said: I agree with Russell here. These stats always baffle me. I run a company with 200 employees. More than half are women. There is no pay disparity for women doing the same jobs as men. Some women make more than men is similar positions and visa versa because we pay on performance. We have hired talented women from the outside and pay them very well. I can think of two women we hired in the past four years that came in at a pay rate much higher than some men at their level because we had to buy their talent and they were very much worth the higher salaries. I see the same in similar businesses that our competitors of ours. Maybe our industry in unique but there is no pay inequality whatsoever in the space I work in. Company dynamics vary. Over the years I've heard comments in hiring discussions, such as - she won't be here long term because she just got married and will soon have children and leave (an assumption) - he needs a raise to support his family (never heard this said for a woman) That was at one company. The place I'm at now, never hear anything like that of the sort. Women aren't penalized for being mothers, where I'm at now. The main difference I see, is that the place I work at now has more women in leadership positions than any other place I've worked. It's not all roses, even at this bastion of gender equality, I still work in the IT field, and men are still promoted more often than women, in the IT department. But it is light years different than any other place I've worked. But I've worked at some pretty archaic, stuck in the 1950s kind of places. My experience over the years, admittedly, has created biases in myself. If I'm ever encouraged to apply somewhere, I get online to check out the organization's leadership. If the only woman in a leadership position is the HR VP/Director, I have no interest in applying. 1
saemo Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 8 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: Here's an interesting alternative perspective on the physicians and teachers: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433973/donald-trump-colorado-delegates-following-rules Yes, I know it's mostly talking about Donald Trump, but the relevant paragraphs are further down: Interesting that the "facts" aren't cited.
why me Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) Of course, women and men who are doing the same job and who are equal in talent should get the same pay. However, we also need to realize that this is just one issue among many where inequality is present. The notion of exploitation is rooted in the capitalist system. If a company can make more profit by paying women less they will do it. However, it is also not in their interest to give men more. If we look at the bigger picture we will see that traditional male oriented jobs are heading out the door. The jobs are being moved to Mexico or somewhere else. This effects men very much. Take a look at this video and tell me what will these men do now that their job is sent south? So we have the identity issue. Women are paid less because of gender. Men are paid more because of gender. Yet, the working male is now seeing their jobs disappear, forcing them to take less paying jobs if not two jobs. It is a real shark tank out there. Lets have a Save Your Job day. Soon, the whole idea of equal pay will not matter very much. Edited April 14, 2016 by why me
why me Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) More information about such inequality. Personally, I am a little suspicious of such days as equal pay day. It is an important issue but it does divide workers between gender. And yet, there needs to be some unity to fight the bigger fight: Save Your Job day. I am all for equal pay. The bigger question is: why does the system think that it can exploit women more. Edited April 14, 2016 by why me
Tacenda Posted April 14, 2016 Author Posted April 14, 2016 14 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: Here's an interesting alternative perspective on the physicians and teachers: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433973/donald-trump-colorado-delegates-following-rules Yes, I know it's mostly talking about Donald Trump, but the relevant paragraphs are further down: Ok, way to make this a political thread Russell!
Russell C McGregor Posted April 14, 2016 Posted April 14, 2016 12 hours ago, saemo said: Interesting that the "facts" aren't cited. It cites no fewer "facts" than any of the material cited to support the "gender pay gap" argument.
Stargazer Posted April 15, 2016 Posted April 15, 2016 20 hours ago, saemo said: Company dynamics vary. Over the years I've heard comments in hiring discussions, such as - she won't be here long term because she just got married and will soon have children and leave (an assumption) - he needs a raise to support his family (never heard this said for a woman) That was at one company. The place I'm at now, never hear anything like that of the sort. Women aren't penalized for being mothers, where I'm at now. The main difference I see, is that the place I work at now has more women in leadership positions than any other place I've worked. It's not all roses, even at this bastion of gender equality, I still work in the IT field, and men are still promoted more often than women, in the IT department. But it is light years different than any other place I've worked. But I've worked at some pretty archaic, stuck in the 1950s kind of places. My experience over the years, admittedly, has created biases in myself. If I'm ever encouraged to apply somewhere, I get online to check out the organization's leadership. If the only woman in a leadership position is the HR VP/Director, I have no interest in applying. I'm in IT, too. We have had a fair number of female developers and managers over the years, but something happened over the last few years that was quite interesting. Note that I work for a state government agency. We had a shakeup in organization because some nut decided to hire a national consulting firm to evaluate our IT infrastructure and make recommendations. Our upper management then implemented their suggestions -- incidentally making us far less responsive to customer requests and this eventually decreased our customer satisfaction tremendously (we're an IT service agency serving other state agencies). But one of the changes was to create a new position, that of Chief Information Officer, or CIO. And our first CIO was a woman hired from within. Note that she was and is a very nice and competent person, and everyone likes her, including me, but over time she acted to make a lot of organizational changes that seemed to result in more and more women taking managerial roles, sometimes replacing men who were virtually forced to retire or encouraged to find work elsewhere. For example, a man who had been a high-level manager, and a very competent one (in fact, he was my manager for much of the time), was demoted to a lower-paid position for no reason -- he decided to take early retirement rather than deal with this. As a result of these changes, I'm pretty sure we have a gender pay-gap going the other way from what the usual complaint is. The ironic thing is, if the organizational changes had happened in the other direction, such that males had replaced females in so many managerial positions, I do believe there would have been a hue and cry over it. As it is, however, nobody to speak of has remarked upon it. Perhaps what has happened has addressed what was a disparity that needed to be addressed. I'm retiring soon, so I'm not bothered about it all. 1
Bernard Gui Posted April 15, 2016 Posted April 15, 2016 On April 13, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Rain said: Some of the lowest paid teachers in the nation are in Utah. Many women choose that profession to be with their children during vacations. There is one reason for you. There are women paid less for the same jobs. Years ago my husband was really angry because everyone on his team would get a raise or are paid a certain amount except the lone woman who had as much experience and was one of better workers. So that does go on. It's just good to find out if that is a problem first. But male and female teachers are paid the same salaries. There is no pay disparity among us teachers. Some of us men choose to be teachers so we can spend vacations with our children, too. When both of us are teachers, we get to spend them with our spouses. Why doesn't everyone become a teacher?
Bernard Gui Posted April 15, 2016 Posted April 15, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, why me said: 14 hours ago, Tacenda said: Ok, way to make this a political thread Russell! Teacher pay is totally political. The "pay gap" is totally political, too. Edited April 15, 2016 by Bernard Gui 1
saemo Posted April 15, 2016 Posted April 15, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Stargazer said: I'm in IT, too. We have had a fair number of female developers and managers over the years, but something happened over the last few years that was quite interesting. Note that I work for a state government agency. We had a shakeup in organization because some nut decided to hire a national consulting firm to evaluate our IT infrastructure and make recommendations. Our upper management then implemented their suggestions -- incidentally making us far less responsive to customer requests and this eventually decreased our customer satisfaction tremendously (we're an IT service agency serving other state agencies). But one of the changes was to create a new position, that of Chief Information Officer, or CIO. And our first CIO was a woman hired from within. Note that she was and is a very nice and competent person, and everyone likes her, including me, but over time she acted to make a lot of organizational changes that seemed to result in more and more women taking managerial roles, sometimes replacing men who were virtually forced to retire or encouraged to find work elsewhere. For example, a man who had been a high-level manager, and a very competent one (in fact, he was my manager for much of the time), was demoted to a lower-paid position for no reason -- he decided to take early retirement rather than deal with this. As a result of these changes, I'm pretty sure we have a gender pay-gap going the other way from what the usual complaint is. The ironic thing is, if the organizational changes had happened in the other direction, such that males had replaced females in so many managerial positions, I do believe there would have been a hue and cry over it. As it is, however, nobody to speak of has remarked upon it. Perhaps what has happened has addressed what was a disparity that needed to be addressed. I'm retiring soon, so I'm not bothered about it all. I've noticed, some CIOs think that change, for the sake of change, means they're getting things done. I call these, bad CIOs, but not so amazingly, they only last 1.5-3 years. ( I've kept track. ) And then they move on to wreak havoc somewhere else In the meantime, you don't have to be female to report sexual discrimination. I've never met anyone who thought it was worth it, but I have one time, in over 30 years, reported someone to HR. They were wayyyyy out of line, with a coworker who was too afraid to say anything herself. Edited April 15, 2016 by saemo 1
why me Posted April 15, 2016 Posted April 15, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Teacher pay is totally political. The "pay gap" is totally political, too. It is also ideological. Back in the 70s the common phrase was 'the personal is political' and this is still true for today. For example, California passed a 15 dollar an hour minimum wage and the University of California Berkeley announced a 500 cut in their workforce affecting both men and women. When one lives in a commodified system, where lives depend more and more on the market, such actions will occur along with inequalities in pay. I don't think that this a gender issue at all. But rather a systemic problem found in an economic system that commodifies workers. After the world war II, various european countries adopted a more decommodified system where workers became less depended on the market and more centered on human well being. The situation is now changing and inequalities are being more seen in the workforce not just between men and women but also in the pay gap between worker and top management. http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/04/13/uc-berkeley-to-cut-500-jobs/ Edited April 15, 2016 by why me
why me Posted April 15, 2016 Posted April 15, 2016 (edited) 19 hours ago, Tacenda said: Ok, way to make this a political thread Russell! The personal is political. It comes with the turf: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_personal_is_political The Carol Hanisch essay The essay first appeared under the title "The Personal is Political" in Notes from the Second Year: Women's Liberation (1970). Carol Hanisch, a member of New York Radical Women and a prominent figure in the Women's Liberation Movement, drafted an article defending the political importance of consciousness-raising groups in February 1969 in Gainesville, Florida.[8] Originally addressed to the women's caucus of the Southern Conference Educational Fund, the paper was first given the title, "Some Thoughts in Response to Dottie [Zellner]’s Thoughts on a Women’s Liberation Movement." Hanisch was then a New York City-based staffer of the Fund and was advocating for it to engage in dedicated organizing for women's liberation in the American South.[8] Hanisch sought to rebut the idea that sex, appearance, abortion, childcare, and the division of household labor were merely personal issues without political importance. To confront these and other issues, she urged women to overcome self-blame, discuss their situations amongst each other, and organize collectively against male domination of society.[8] Hanisch does not use the phrase "the personal is political" in the essay, but writes: One of the first things we discover in these groups is that personal problems are political problems. There are no personal solutions at this time. There is only collective action for a collective solution.[8] The essay was published under the title, "The Personal Is Political," in Notes from the Second Year: Women’s Liberation in 1970. The essay's author believes that Shulamith Firestone and Anne Koedt, the book's editors, gave the essay its famous title.[8] It has since been reprinted in Radical Feminism: A Documentary Reader.[9] http://www.carolhanisch.org/CHwritings/PIP.html The essay is in the above link. .Those were the days my friend.... Edited April 15, 2016 by why me
Recommended Posts