Video: Do women earn less than men?

posted at 3:06 pm on April 17, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Happy National Equal Pay Day! Yes, it’s a holiday — and Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has already marked the occasion with an unsubtle jab aimed at GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney.

The National Committee on Pay Equity (yes, that exists, too) started Equal Pay Day in 1996 to call attention to the gender wage gap. Here’s the idea: It would take the average working woman all of 2011 plus 2012 up to today, April 17, to earn what the average man would earn in just 2011.

That proves that women often occupy lower-paying jobs than men — but does it really prove that women don’t receive equal pay for equal work? Not necessarily. As LearnLiberty’s Steve Horwitz explains in this video, four crucial differences in the way men and women approach work account for the gender wage gap.

  1. Men and women make different educational choices. While men often pursue careers in engineering or other hard sciences, women often pursue careers in the social sciences or the caregiving realm. Some liberals argue that “the pay scale for different occupations is connected to whether or not the occupations are made up of mostly men or mostly women.” (Personally, I find that hard to believe as, once upon a time, primarily men worked in all those occupations, so the different pay scales couldn’t have developed according to whether primarily men or primarily women worked in those occupations.) Sarah Damaske, author of For the Family? How Class and Gender Shape Women’s Work, is one such liberal. “Caregiving, whether done unpaid in the home or for pay outside of it, is not particularly valued in this country and women (whether in the labor market or not) suffer the brunt of this,” she writes. Nevertheless, even Damaske does not argue that occupational differences — many stemming from the different educational choices men and women make — do not account in part for the gender wage gap.
  2. Men and women also often have different expectations about their career. A women who does not expect to work when she has her first child or who expects to go part-time when she has her first child makes different career choices than a man who expects to work his entire life.
  3. Women are more likely to work part-time than men.
  4. Men and women differ in their tenure on a job or the way in which their careers are interrupted.

As Horwitz puts it, until women enter high-paying fields in the same numbers as men and until men share equally responsibility for caring for children, the gender wage gap is likely to persist. “Whatever choices men and women make,” Horwitz says in the video,” the wages they’re paid in the market will reflect the productivity of those choices and are not the result of discrimination.”

I’d argue that it’s OK that a gender wage gap exists, as women likely need and want to be able to trade higher wages for greater flexibility and other perks. Once again, liberals are in the position of suggesting that how much money or material benefits a person receives is more important than intangibles.

When a woman agrees to particular wages for a particular job, she implies by her agreement that she thinks those wages are fair. That assessment really shouldn’t be altered by subsequent knowledge that someone else — whether another woman or a man — receives more. If a woman doesn’t think the pay is fair, she should negotiate for more — or find a job elsewhere.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I saw this posted online, and knew it was a silly comparison. Comparing median salaries, is not how you know if people are underpaid or not.

firepilot on April 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM

They do in PBHO’s administration.

Bishop on April 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM

When a woman agrees to particular wages for a particular job, she implies by her agreement that she thinks those wages are fair. That assessment really shouldn’t be altered by subsequent knowledge that someone else — whether another woman or a man — receives more. If a woman doesn’t think the pay is fair, she should negotiate for more — or find a job elsewhere.

C’mon, Tina. That’s just crazy talk.
///

Bitter Clinger on April 17, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Back in the day, my mom earned more than my dad. That was really bizarre in the 70s!

:)

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on April 17, 2012 at 3:11 PM

If there is a gap, it’s mostly because of this:

Men and women differ in their tenure on a job or the way in which their careers are interrupted.

But if we really want to know we should check with the White House and see why women get paid less there.

forest on April 17, 2012 at 3:12 PM

There’s a number 5 on this list. Women are much less likely to negotiate for higher salaries, and when they do, then tend to be weaker negotiators. I read about this some years ago so no longer have a link, but there were several psychological studies on the topic.

Dee2008 on April 17, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The women on the White House staff make 18% less than the men doing the same job…but Jay Carney could some how say they are paid the same, because women use more toilet paper in the bathrooms or something!

KOOLAID2 on April 17, 2012 at 3:18 PM

And then there’s this. Women control more personal wealth and make far more decisions on how money gets spent than men do. It’s no accident that women are smart multi-tasking dynamos in ads while men are portrayed as hapless idiots.

forest on April 17, 2012 at 3:19 PM

There’s another reason for discrepancy:

Hazard Pay.

Men do more dangerous jobs as a rule, and thus are compensated for physical risk to themselves. Were you to do just be percentages (98% vs. 2%) and not actual numbers, “Equal Death Day – the day female employment deaths meet male employment deaths for the previous year” would occur in late November / Mid – December. In actuality it’d take 20 Years or so for female employment-related deaths to equal male employment-related deaths for a single year.

BKennedy on April 17, 2012 at 3:22 PM

No one forces anyone to work for less than they are willing to work for.

Unless it’s a union job pay is negotiable.

If it is a union job pay set is by contract.

Those claiming women are discriminated against in the job market by paying them less can use that knowledge to make a lot of money, if it is true.

If you can pay women significantly less than men then find women qualified for every job in your company and hire only the women. The men won’t take the job anyway because you won’t pay them what they can get elsewhere, right? You should have a significant cost advantage over the competition and can use this to lower your prices, take market share from your competition, and a make lot of money on sales volume and share price.

farsighted on April 17, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Yeah, on average, they probably do earn less in the workplace.
But it works out even because they push us into an early grave and inherit.

LegendHasIt on April 17, 2012 at 3:23 PM

When my wife works a holiday, she gets time-and-a-half and makes more per hour than I do.

skydaddy on April 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM

but Jay Carney could some how say they are paid the same, because women use more toilet paper in the bathrooms or something!

KOOLAID2 on April 17, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Jay Carney knows at least three women who use toilet paper in the bathrooms. You’ll need to be more specific. :)

gravityman on April 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM

When a woman agrees to particular wages for a particular job, she implies by her agreement that she thinks those wages are fair.

Yeah – that just don’t hunt. Accepting a position, because it’s the best you can do is, in no way, the same as saying you’re receiving fair pay (and/or benefits, etc.). To a certain extent, sure . . . if you don’t like the situation, don’t take the job.

Let’s make the point in reverse. Who thinks they’re getting paid too much? Show of hands? (Movie stars put your hands down.) Thought so.

Taking a job doesn’t so much have to do with fairness so much as “I gotta have a job, now.” So, this argument is spurious.

That said, I think women do trade cash for flexibility. Just as most of us trade cash for experience.

Pablo Snooze on April 17, 2012 at 3:28 PM

EVERYONE, should earn $1,000,000,000 a year!!!!

If they are a French fry thrower at McDonalds or a chef at “21″. Except for the Ruling Class they are exempt from these rules for the little people.

Of course a home would cost $16 trillion and a new car $5 trillion or such but hey…..we won’t have rich people anymore!!!!!

Viva Fairness!!!!

PappyD61 on April 17, 2012 at 3:29 PM

could the Dems please stop warring on women? Debbie looks a little frazzled.

DHChron on April 17, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Jay Carney knows at least three women who use toilet paper in the bathrooms. You’ll need to be more specific. :)

gravityman on April 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Nice one!

Pablo Snooze on April 17, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Here I come to wreck the day!

An employer should offer the same pay for the same job regardless of sex.

Plain and simple.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Yeah, on average, they probably do earn less in the workplace.
But it works out even because they push us into an early grave and inherit.

LegendHasIt on April 17, 2012 at 3:23 PM
</blockquote

Great Point!!!

Let's compare "wealth-years" of the sexes!!

…And who do we picket and/or sue over that "unequal life expectancy" benefit???

landlines on April 17, 2012 at 3:38 PM

An employer should offer the same pay for the same job regardless of sex.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:37 PM

What exactly are we talking about here?

NoDonkey on April 17, 2012 at 3:39 PM

An employer should offer the same pay for the same job regardless of sex.
damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:37 PM

I dunno. Seems to me that they should get lots more if there is sex involved too.

LegendHasIt on April 17, 2012 at 3:40 PM

NoDonkey on April 17, 2012 at 3:39 PM

you know what I mean, a male or female.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Here I come to wreck the day!

An employer should offer the same pay for the same job regardless of sex.

Plain and simple.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Problem is things like seniority, experience and other variables. If a guy has been on the job and is good at it, should a new hire get the same pay for doing the same job? A rule like that would kinda outlaw raises.

forest on April 17, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Back when all our children were small the hubby and I were looking at buying life insurance. We were kind of surprised by what we found. To buy insurance on my husband all we needed to do was replace his salary, because I, as a stay-at-home mom, did everything else. But to allow my husband and kids to replace everything I did for them, we needed to buy insurance worth 3 times what we bought for my full-time working husband.

So yes, my staying at home did not bring money into the household, however, the value to the household was still there, and value it was indeed.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out, just an average housewife. But, of course, the only number that counts to people like the ones who create these bogus anti-woman committees are the numbers which stack up with men’s numbers. No other numbers can count.

To them, the only way a woman can have any value is when she is competing directly against a man.

Lily on April 17, 2012 at 3:44 PM

1.Men and women make different educational choices. While men often pursue careers in engineering or other hard sciences, women often pursue careers in the social sciences or the caregiving realm. Some liberals argue that “the pay scale for different occupations is connected to whether or not the occupations are made up of mostly men or mostly women.”

While it makes sense that women tend to gravitate towards the caregiving and social sciences, and men towards the hard sciences, one thing about the concept of how the relates to pay in the workforce for those fields doesn’t add up to me.

Let’s take the caregiving industry, especially elderly care. There tends to be far more women in that field, which makes total sense. However, that also means that it must be primarily women moving into the administration and higher positions in that field, since they do makeup the bulk of the workforce in that field. I certainly see far more women in all levels of elderly nursing care when I visit elderly family in assisted living facilities than I do men and by a very large margin. They are in every level of position from upper administration (those levels setting those salaries) to nursing to cleaning crew. So, is someone arguing that women are choosing to pay other women less than they would pay a man in industries where women dominate the workforce at all levels? That doesn’t seem to make much sense to me.

It seems to me that we perceive racism and sexism where it really doesn’t exist much, at least not as a pervasive attitude in large sections of the population. There are always a few old curmudgeons clinging to their grumpy old sexist and racist ideals, but that hardly seems to me to be the majority attitude that the media and whiners on the left would like us all to believe it is.

When taken in the mean over the entire workforce, there is probably a difference in pay between men and women. Is it because the vast majority of men are sexist pigs though? I doubt it. I think there are numerous other factors at work that have far more influence than sexism (see the commenter above about dangerous jobs and hazard pay).

gravityman on April 17, 2012 at 3:45 PM

forest on April 17, 2012 at 3:44 PM

I am not talking about that.

If a man and a woman apply for the same job, the pay should be the same offered to both.

If one has more experience than the other, then that is a factor on pay offering.

But to say that a female should get lower than a male with the same experience, thats wrong.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Read John Stossel’s book GIMME A BREAK. He talks about this topic at length. His main takeaway — if there were truly this gap of around 20% pay for the same type of work, many companies would have already replaced their entire male workforce with women and saved 20% in salary costs.

DOOF on April 17, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Only when the the left needs another scapegoat.

Speakup on April 17, 2012 at 3:54 PM

“Some liberals argue that ‘the pay scale for different occupations is connected to whether or not the occupations are made up of mostly men or mostly women.’”

Even if true, so what? You want to go into one of those professions? Great. Understand that you can make more doing other things.

It is your choice to go into those professions, therefore it’s your choice to take the lower pay. That makes it your problem, and nobody else’s.

Grow up, and take responsibility for your decisions.

Greg Q on April 17, 2012 at 3:57 PM

I am not talking about that.

If a man and a woman apply for the same job, the pay should be the same offered to both.

If one has more experience than the other, then that is a factor on pay offering.

But to say that a female should get lower than a male with the same experience, thats wrong.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Have you ever seen a job listed with a different starting salary for men than for women? I worked in hiring, and have never seen such a thing. When an offer is made, the hiring manager will take experience and education into account–which sometimes means a woman will get a better starting offer. But men are much more likely to negotiate for higher salaries than those offered, so may walk away with better offers more often than not.

There a lots of reasons men average higher pay than women, but most of them are only indirectly related to gender.

Dee2008 on April 17, 2012 at 4:00 PM

For those who do not understand how the job market, or any market for that matter, works…

An employer offers the lowest wage they think the candidate they want to hire will accept. The job candidate is free to accept or decline. The employer risks losing a desired employee if they offer too little. This is called freedom, economic freedom, for both the employer and the prospective employee.

And even after accepting a job an employee is free to find another employer who will pay more, free quit at a moments notice, and free go to work elsewhere.

Because of current federal laws governing termination employers have less freedom to terminate an employee and hire another who would work for less.

farsighted on April 17, 2012 at 4:01 PM

damian1967:

If a man is willing to work 50 hours a week, and a woman is only willing / able to work 45, should they get paid the same?

If a woman is planning on working for 5 years, then dropping out to have kids, should a company groom her for promotions the way they will a man who’s planning on staying in the job market for the next 40 years?

It’s a free market. You are welcome to make any deal you can find someone to take the other side of. What is your work worth? Simple: what are people willing to pay you to do that work?

Greg Q on April 17, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Paid Maternity Leave!!!

Roy Rogers on April 17, 2012 at 4:10 PM

If I had a daughter she’d look like one the women working in this administration.

rogerb on April 17, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Since paid liberal troll shrieks that any difference in pay between women and men means that the employer is discriminating, let it explain the difference between pay for women and men in the Obama administration.

And if it tries to spin about job, performance, and educational differences, let it state that its Barack Obama Party spokesperson Debbie Wasserman-Schulz is a liar, since she shrieks that there are no valid reasons for any woman to ever be paid differently than any man.

The lies the paid liberal troll tells are just ridiculous. And the only way to get it to stop lying is to force it to hold its fellow Obama supporters similarly accountable.

northdallasthirty on April 17, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Read John Stossel’s book GIMME A BREAK. He talks about this topic at length. His main takeaway — if there were truly this gap of around 20% pay for the same type of work, many companies would have already replaced their entire male workforce with women and saved 20% in salary costs.

DOOF on April 17, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Sorry — the correct Stossel book is Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel — Why Everything You Know is Wrong

DOOF on April 17, 2012 at 4:21 PM

It’s a free market. You are welcome to make any deal you can find someone to take the other side of. What is your work worth? Simple: what are people willing to pay you to do that work?

Greg Q on April 17, 2012 at 4:01 PM

damian1967 is a liberal, Greg, which means two things:

1) It has no idea how much its work is actually worth

2) It believes that its high-school course in transgender underwater basket-weaving qualifies it for the same salary as a neurosurgeon with twelve years of college, med school, and postdoctoral training.

Delusional leftists like damian1967 want the world to pay them based on that with which they were born and that with which they deigned to actually decide to do. They have zero concept of the value of labor, education, or experience; all they know is that, if you make more than they do, that someone else is discriminating against them and favoring you.

northdallasthirty on April 17, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Women make more money in porn. Not fair. I want an official day to call attention to that.

WhatSlushfund on April 17, 2012 at 4:29 PM

damian1967:
 
If a man is willing to work 50 hours a week, and a woman is only willing / able to work 45, should they get paid the same?…
 
Greg Q on April 17, 2012 at 4:01 PM

 
Greg Q, trust me when I say not to make the effort unless you just want to kill some time and talk to every other poster in the thread. Here’s the trend. If you choose to continue, tell me if it ends up this way:
 
Make claim.
Get called on claim.
(Looks like we’re at this step, btw)
Insist claim is correct.
Say other posters are using right-wing talking points.
Say other posters should read to be informed.
Ignore links.
Ignore posters.
Change subject when it becomes unbearably clear that claim has been debunked.
Repeat all steps indefinitely.
 
He went on for seven pages the other night after insisting budgets require 60 votes to pass in the Senate. It was one of the most bizarre threads I’ve seen on hotair, finally ending with claims of death threats and how his business is doing so well that he just bought a house he and his family have lived in for fifteen years. Yeah, I know. Re-reading it again won’t help.
 
You’ll get little reward other than the ability to make other posters laugh at ill-preparedness that isn’t recognized (you’re off to a good start, too, so you’ll likely be ignored).

rogerb on April 17, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Do women earn less than men?

In terms of taxable income, sure.

But if you put any reasonable value on the services provided at home to young children, very few men are capable of doing anything nearly as valuable. So the family’s income statement considering all household contributions would say they produce much more.

EconomicNeocon on April 17, 2012 at 4:45 PM

If a man and a woman apply for the same job, the pay should be the same offered to both.
If one has more experience than the other, then that is a factor on pay offering.
But to say that a female should get lower than a male with the same experience, thats wrong.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:48 PM

I agree with you on this point – but the studies don’t take into account the difference in experience levels – even within the same career fields. A man at age 35 may have about 15 years experience in a particular job, while a woman in the same job who has taken time off to have a couple kids and get them to school age may only have 8 years of relevant experience in the job. Sorry to have to say it, but based on experience the woman is not worth the same amount as the man. Most career fields I’ve seen and dealt with have different levels based on education and years of actual experience.

BKennedy on April 17, 2012 at 3:22 PM

Another valid point. about 14 years ago I was on a small town council. We had a town clerk quit and then sue the town for sex discrimination because she was paid less than the police chief and director of public works. She had written the town’s policy manual
that specified salary increases for seniority with the town – she had 6 years, worked in the office, and supervised 1 other person; the police chief had 18 years worked all hours hazardous duty and supervised 10 people; and the public works director had 20 years worked all hours hazardous duty and supervized 15 people.
But she expected the same pay as the other 2 – and the federal EEOC supported her position.
Explain to how tha makes sense.

dentarthurdent on April 17, 2012 at 4:46 PM

And are they comparing apples to oranges?
I have an engineering BS, and 29 years of relevant experience in my field – including active duty military time.
My wife is 3 years younger than me, has a business/IT BA and a Library Masters, chose to take time off to raise our kids, and chose to work in a library part time (for flexibility) – 13 years now.
I make about 6 or 7 times what she makes. According to these studies, would that be considered unfair?

dentarthurdent on April 17, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Before I’d agree that women are paid less than men for doing the exact same thing you will have to explain why men’s unemployment rate isn’t 80 percent or higher. No matter how much the typical boss wants to discriminate against women he’s just not going to hire any men if he can get the same work out of a women and pay her 20 percent less. If this discrimination was wide spread there would be signs posted all over saying “men need not apply.” After all, the cost of paying all your workers comes to what? 75 percent of the typical employers costs of doing business. On what basis could he ever justify hiring a guy when he could get the same job done for 20 percent less by only hiring women?

Fred 2 on April 17, 2012 at 4:55 PM

BTW – in the military women get exactly the same pay as men for the same rank and time in grade. In the defense contracting industry, in my experience as a manager, women get the same pay as men for the same job, with the same education/skills, and the same years of directly applicable experience. However, I would not guarantee thats true with all companies or all hiring managers.

dentarthurdent on April 17, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Men are simply going to have to be the ones who get pregnant, so that women don’t have to be the only ones saddled with that responsibility. This whole biology thing is an artificially construct borne of institutional patriarchy. Or something.

manwithblackhat on April 17, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Not at the White House.

It’s been my experience that in high tech they usually do get paid the same.

dogsoldier on April 17, 2012 at 5:24 PM

rogerb,

Thanks for the heads up. I try not to get into long pointless comment wars, but I don’t always succeed.

Greg Q on April 17, 2012 at 5:25 PM

Greg Q on April 17, 2012 at 5:25 PM

 
Sometimes it can be fun, but for some reason those weren’t. They were just strange and sort of depressing knowing your votes were of equal weight.

rogerb on April 17, 2012 at 5:55 PM

One of my department mates-an early 20-something guy-and I were hired two weeks apart @ the same rate per hour.
We both recently got our year reviews and were given similarly glowing evals. We both received the same raise-so we are STILL making the same amount.
Works for me.

annoyinglittletwerp on April 17, 2012 at 7:38 PM

This really isn’t about equality or justice.
-
The left has discovered prejudice, making women victims, in un-equal hair cut prices, un-equal shoe prices, and just about anything a women’s-studies freshman can imagine. It’s really quite easy. How ’bout we give it a try?
-

Based on their bottom-line only logic, prejudice against men is rampant because men are under-represented in the professions of teaching, nursing, wrestling, and stripping. Equally shocking is that there’s more men in prison, more female parents, more men dying in combat, more women graduating from college, and uhh, women live longer. OK, let’s stop there.
-
Now we, the victims (defendants) propose there be federal laws forcing social justice through affirmative action to make these inequalities 50-50. Oversight and administration of these will be done by federally financed conservative non-profits, providing perpetual salaries for activist conservatives. If these laws are not created, it must be due to “the evil matriarchy”. (or prejudice, stupidity, etc.)

Simple for them to do. but we keep reacting to it, like a trained dog. That is a REAL problem.

KyserS on April 17, 2012 at 7:42 PM

This fake injustice was discredited in a thoroughly researched book in 2005 called “Why Men Earn More”. Anticipating an assault on the book, the author packed it with references, accounting for at least a fourth of the book. One chapter illustrated how women can make MORE than men, doing less work, simply by cashing in on the existing leftist equality-laws. The result, feminists laid low for about a year, and started up with this fake issue again.
-
The Left has four objectives here:
1. Control the headlines.
2. Distract the Right.
3. Get their own troops agitated to fight.
4. Sell the idea that market forces are unfair and need (their) management.
-
The left is meeting their objectives.

KyserS on April 17, 2012 at 7:44 PM

We conservatives are right where the left wants us.
-
We have not fully woken up.
WE ARE NOT THEIR AUDIENCE.
They are not preaching to us.
They are not listening to our reasoning.
They are not seeking truth.
They are not stupid or crazy.
They know all the truth they want to know.
They don’t care because they are seeking power.
They are in a war…to win it.
-
Emily post would tell us etiquette may be suspended in warfare.

One of the main reason we won our Revolutionary war is the English tradition of standing in formation with their muskets, and expecting the same from us. We stood behind trees and rocks and picked them off. But, they were righteous as they lost the war.

Conservatives tend to believe that truth is persuasive. The left wants us to continue to believe this. They don’t care about the truth, so conservatives are “shooting blanks”. The left likes conservatives spending their time and energy intellectualizing and moralizing.

We’re on the verge of losing a war that we refuse to believe we are in.
-
THIS IS COMBAT FOLKS, WAKE UP.

KyserS on April 17, 2012 at 7:59 PM

I saw this posted online, and knew it was a silly comparison. Comparing median salaries, is not how you know if people are underpaid or not.

firepilot on April 17, 2012 at 3:08 PM

If an adult agrees to take a job at a certain wage the only person they have to blame is themselves.

Here I come to wreck the day!

An employer should offer the same pay for the same job regardless of sex.

Plain and simple.

damian1967 on April 17, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Of course it is never really that simple except in your tiny oh so tiny head. Gawd you’re dumb.

CW on April 17, 2012 at 8:42 PM

No.

This has been so thoroughly disproved it’s ridiculous. All but something like 3% of the disparity has been explained and even the 3% doesn’t indicate discrimination.

WeekendAtBernankes on April 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM

“When a woman agrees to particular wages for a particular job, she implies by her agreement that she thinks those wages are fair.”

Are you bloody well kidding? In this market? When a woman takes a job, she is implying she is happy she was able to get something, anything in this lousy economy, where people are losing their jobs left and right.

The attitude, at least in the corporate work force, is entirely based on fear — they work you like a dog and you are an “at will” employee — meaning, if you don’t like it — get lost. No matter that you are already doing the job of two people while they cut everyone around you. You are happy just to HAVE a job. i know because I am in just such a situation.

There is no implied or actual pleasure in the arrangement. Trust me on that one.

Anifin on April 18, 2012 at 12:07 AM

When you remove the confounding variables the gender difference in pay has already been reversed. In the population of young, never married, without children women out earn men, with the difference being up to 20% in some markets. Women possess an enormous advantage in numbers in college enrollment and degrees earned at all levels from undergrad to doctorate,with the ratio above 135/100 and closing in on 150/100 in some fields and levels. As someone pointed out above men die in the workplace in an overwhelming ratio to women. Despite the nonsense about this economic downturn being harder on women, the unemployment rate for men was close to 2% higher for men than for women from the start of the recession until just recently when the gap finally began to narrow.

djaces on April 18, 2012 at 5:06 AM

Please excuse the harsh language here but I simply have to call bullshit on this.

As a woman electronics engineer still working past retirement age simply because I can’t stand not working, 50+ years of industry experience suggests that women with the same education, same degree of intelligence, and doing the same work get less than “98%” of what men get. It’s closer to 90% in good settings and in companies that are basically geek mens clubs it’s closer to 60% if the woman is willing to work there at all. This has improved over the years, some. I stuck with it and typically could negotiate up to about 90% of what the men were making since I have a God given talent for the work I do – that maybe half of the men shared.

So enough of this boy’s club rationalization guys. When women try to compete in engineering and information technology the equal pay simply is not there. It is closer to there today than when I entered the professional workplace in the late 60s.

{^_^}

herself on April 18, 2012 at 5:27 AM

Men are simply going to have to be the ones who get pregnant, so that women don’t have to be the only ones saddled with that responsibility. This whole biology thing is an artificially construct borne of institutional patriarchy. Or something.

manwithblackhat on April 17, 2012 at 5:11 PM

Actually, some of the diehard feminist literature out of the sixties and seventies argue very nearly that exact case. Perhaps not calling it ‘artificial constructs of the patriarchy’, but definitely talking about the tyranny of biology.

SpikeRHSC on April 18, 2012 at 5:50 AM

I don’t know herself or her situation, but working in the semiconductor market, in an engineering-intensive subsection of the industry, the very few female design engineers earn the same pay for the same level of work. The very few female field service engineers earn the same pay for the same level of work.

Maybe this company is an outlier on the global statistical return. I should check with our primary statistician (a female who is paid more than several others at the same title rank) what her data shows. Or I could just ask our CFO what she thinks.

But, even in this supposedly unusual example, most of the females employed are in administrative jobs; logistics, finance, secr err, executive assistants, etc. Why? Because most of them have or plan to have children. They cannot afford to be in a work capacity which can demand travel, or extended hours in the workplace, and the jobs they choose allow them more flexibility to miss days when dealing with family illness, school problems, what have you. This is just how it is. Those workers chose the educational and work experience paths to be in those positions, and the few females who did not, but accepted the chance of positions with greater accountability, receive compensation in line with anyone else doing the same work.

Also, this complaint is especially difficult to swallow if you ever look outside of the U.S. In our foreign regions, I have yet to deal with a customer account manager, service manager, or other executive of any level who is female. The ladies in those cultures are strictly office workers in finance and logistics.

Freelancer on April 18, 2012 at 11:39 AM

It is totally unfair that Oprah Winfrey makes so much more money than I do! I demand equal pay!

Colony14 on April 18, 2012 at 5:17 PM