Equal Pay

[mattsmith48]

Why is it so hard to do it? It seems every election they talk about it like its going to be a priority when they get elected and four years later, nothing. Men and women must be paid the same for doing the same work, how hard can that be? Its not like its a controversial where both sides have point. If anyone were to come out and say women should make less than men, every one else would look and tell them 'what the fuck is wrong with you?

[PlasmaHam]

It is already illegal to pay people more or less based upon their gender. Been that way since the 70s, at least in the USA. What do you expect politicians to do? Make it more illegal?

[mattsmith48]

It is already illegal to pay people more or less based upon their gender. Been that way since the 70s, at least in the USA. What do you expect politicians to do? Make it more illegal?

Depending on the source you look at the gap in the US is between 0.80 and 0.91, so somewhere there is a problem, maybe its from a non-enforcement of the law or not the punishment is not severe enough, etc.

[Babs]

Depending on the source you look at the gap in the US is between 0.80 and 0.91, so somewhere there is a problem, maybe its from a non-enforcement of the law or not the punishment is not severe enough, etc.

Would you mind citing a source that specifically deals with men and women working for the same company or in the same industry?

[Dalcourt]

Would you mind citing a source that specifically deals with men and women working for the same company or in the same industry?

Yeah, would be interesting. I often hear people complain about this unequal payment thing but I find it hard to believe that the same company would do different paychecks.

[Snowfox]

also what counts is how much they do work overtime. or how well they perform.
In my work at constructions there is one woman who is mason and one man who is also mason. both are stonemasons. Man is way faster and does work a lot more than this woman. Both of them do good job but this man does bit better since he has been doing that bricklaying last 25 years while this woman has been in business for 15 years. Man makes more and i fail to see anything wrong in that. Well I am not SJW

[Stronk Serb]

It's illegal to pay them more, but the reason why all women combined earn less than all men combined is because some do not work and decide to stay at home. Also many professions are female-dominated, like teaching, kindergartens, nurses. Also many women decide on careers which simply pay less.

The pay gap in the US is a lie. It is essentially combining the earnings of all females and comparing them to the earnings of all men. Also if women were really paid less than men in a same company doing the same job, why wouldn't the evil patriarchic capitalists have an all-female workforce? Would be definitely more profitable.

[Living For Love]

Depending on the source you look at the gap in the US is between 0.80 and 0.91, so somewhere there is a problem, maybe its from a non-enforcement of the law or not the punishment is not severe enough, etc.
Nope, it's because of the loopholes buried in the EPA that significantly reduce its effectiveness and are easily exploited by employers. Not to mention that, in some cases, paying men and women the same might be detrimental for women, thought I agree that, nonetheless, equal work should be rewarded with equal pay.

[ShineintheDark]

I recently went to a medical lecture day at a local hospital where they had a panel of women discussing female-orientated issues. One such woman there was a female cardiothoracic surgeon who had been in the profession for many years and she was asked this question. She agreed with the idea that it was less a disparity between the wages of the surgeons and more the fact that promotions and pay rises are few and far between in many industries, especially medicine, and that she personally believes that her female coworkers were being too unmotivated to push and apply for them. Baring in mind this is a woman who is a surgeon, one of the most male dominated professions in the modern job climate; cardiothoracic surgery being even more so. Therefore, I'm more likely to believe her opinion on the matter from her personal experience than many flawed surveys.

[Living For Love]

Also if women were really paid less than men in a same company doing the same job, why wouldn't the evil patriarchic capitalists have an all-female workforce?
Because of maternity leave and other factors that are intrinsically associated with females. That's basically one of the main issues of EPA.

[PlasmaHam]

As stated, the idea that women are earning an unfair percentage less than men is based upon a flawed study. It essentially just compared the average paycheck of the two genders, failing to account for other variables. For instance, men are more likely to work longer hours, and are more likely to work high-paying jobs. Women on the other hand are more likely to take breaks from their jobs, be it maternity leave or vacation, and to work part-time due to raising a family. If you include all the variables, then you come up with a pay-gap that is essentially non-existent.
...She agreed with the idea that it was less a disparity between the wages of the surgeons and more the fact that promotions and pay rises are few and far between in many industries, especially medicine, and that she personally believes that her female coworkers were being too unmotivated to push and apply for them. Baring in mind this is a woman who is a surgeon, one of the most male dominated professions in the modern job climate; cardiothoracic surgery being even more so.
I've heard this before, from many professional women in male-dominated work-forces. Women, on average, aren't as assertive as men. Which is a good thing in some situations, but not when it comes to limited job promotion in high stress environments. Men are simply more likely to put them self out there for a promotion, so they are more likely to get it.

[NewLeafsFan]

As a left wing progressive I don't believe in equal pay. That sounds a little bit too far left for me. Borderline communism. Some people pay and work hard for an education or a certain position and they deserve the benefits that comes with their position.

[maddogmj77]

As a left wing progressive I don't believe in equal pay... Some people pay and work hard for an education or a certain position and they deserve the benefits that comes with their position.

You believe that two people, doing the exact same job, with the exact same qualifications, for the exact same company, should be allowed to be payed different amounts simply based on their gender or any other discriminatory status?

Keep in mind, this is already illegal. The wage gap is due to Men being in higher paying jobs; not Women being paid less for the same job.

That sounds a little bit too far left for me. Borderline communism.

You obviously have no idea what communism is, or entails.
Equal Pay is an idea of Social Democracy; A way to lessen the consequences of Faissez-Faire Capitalism.

In communism, there is no government, no private companies, & no money.
So "Equal pay" wouldn't even exist because a communist country wouldn't have money.

When someone suggests that the workers "sieze the means of production", 'then' you might be onto something.

[lliam]

Even if a woman in the same industry earns less on the same job than a man in the same position, that doesn't necessarily mean that her salary is only lower because she is a woman. She can just have the misfortune to work for a company that either doesn't want to pay more for this job ... or they can't pay more.

[NewLeafsFan]

You believe that two people, doing the exact same job, with the exact same qualifications, for the exact same company, should be allowed to be payed different amounts simply based on their gender or any other discriminatory status?

Keep in mind, this is already illegal. The wage gap is due to Men being in higher paying jobs; not Women being paid less for the same job.



You obviously have no idea what communism is, or entails.
Equal Pay is an idea of Social Democracy; A way to lessen the consequences of Faissez-Faire Capitalism.

In communism, there is no government, no private companies, & no money.
So "Equal pay" wouldn't even exist because a communist country wouldn't have money.

When someone suggests that the workers "sieze the means of production", 'then' you might be onto something.

I'm sorry. I had misunderstood part of the post. Men and women with equal experience and qualifications should earn equal pay. My mistake.

[Dmaxd123]

i have also heard that sometimes a woman may get payed less because she doesn't negotiate her starting salary or doesn't ask for a raise

if the male counterpart asks for a raise and he deserves it he gets it, but if the woman doesn't ask boss assumes she is happy so may just give a standard cost of living raise or a bonus but not actually pay more out

so no one is at fault in that scenario it's just business and personalities

[lliam]

if the male counterpart asks for a raise and he deserves it he gets it, but if the woman doesn't ask boss assumes she is happy


that goes for males who never ask too. If someone wants more money, he or she must be active and prove to the boss that his/her work is worth it. Who sells oneself under value, or does nothing at all, will never even be noticed by the boss. As for that, those guys can't never expect a substantial salary increase.

[Arkansasguy]

As already stated, the pay gap is a myth.

In any case though, the fundamental premise is flawed. Since men are supposed to be the breadwinners, married men with kids should be paid more.

[maddogmj77]

Since men are supposed to be the breadwinners

That's pretty sexist.

married men with kids should be paid more.

Compared to their Wives? Why? Again, this is fairly sexist and discriminatory.

What if it was a lesbian couple with kids? or a single mom?

[Arkansasguy]

That's pretty sexist.

So? What is "sexism"? And why is it bad?

Compared to their Wives?

A mother's place is in the home. It is the man's responsibility to provide for his wife, not vice versa.

What if it was a lesbian couple with kids? or a single mom?

Bad behavior should not be rewarded. In the case of a widow or desertion victim with children, yes, she should make more than a single person.

[Babs]

So? What is "sexism"? And why is it bad?



A mother's place is in the home. It is the man's responsibility to provide for his wife, not vice versa.



Bad behavior should not be rewarded. In the case of a widow or desertion victim with children, yes, she should make more than a single person.

don't cut yourself on that edge dicky dog

[Living For Love]

A mother's place is in the home. It is the man's responsibility to provide for his wife, not vice versa.
And that's pretty misandrist lmao, why should men go to work while their wives stay at home? Men can perfectly raise kids too, it's not something exclusive of women.

[Arkansasguy]

And that's pretty misandrist lmao

Just labeling an idea with some random epithet doesn't discredit it.

why should men go to work while their wives stay at home? Men can perfectly raise kids too, it's not something exclusive of women.

Against this stands the universal experience of people everywhere. That women are better at nurturing young children is something that everyone knows, and the affective differences that make this so are noticeable even in children. It's just the way people are wired.

[Living For Love]

Against this stands the universal experience of people everywhere.
Which people? Where?

That women are better at nurturing young children is something that everyone knows, and the affective differences that make this so are noticeable even in children. It's just the way people are wired.
What differences? I'm curious about what makes you think women are naturally better care-givers.

[Arkansasguy]

Which people? Where?

Do literally anywhere in the world, including daycares and elementary schools, and you will, and you will see that women are better suited to the care of young children.

What differences? I'm curious about what makes you think women are naturally better care-givers.

It's really not that hard to grasp. Toy companies get it. You literally have to expend effort not to understand that woman are better disposed to taking care of children than men.

[Babs]

Against this stands the universal experience of people everywhere. That women are better at nurturing young children is something that everyone knows, and the affective differences that make this so are noticeable even in children. It's just the way people are wired.

Men and women do have hormonal and neurological differences that fuel different urges and inclinations, this is true. But we have evolved to have so much more than our animal instincts and it'd be a damn waste to restrict ourselves to dated traditions if that's not what the individual wants. We got big ol brains for a reason guy, thoughts > urges.

[Arkansasguy]

Men and women do have hormonal and neurological differences that fuel different urges and inclinations, this is true. But we have evolved to have so much more than our animal instincts and it'd be a damn waste to restrict ourselves to dated traditions if that's not what the individual wants. We got big ol brains for a reason guy, thoughts > urges.

What individuals want is largely a product of nature+society. We don't come with built-in individual wants and desires. And the vast majority of women throughout history have been perfectly content with motherhood. Even with the indoctrination of the modern era, rates of part-time employment evince this natural desire.

[Babs]

What individuals want is largely a product of nature+society. We don't come with built-in individual wants and desires. And the vast majority of women throughout history have been perfectly content with motherhood. Even with the indoctrination of the modern era, rates of part-time employment evince this natural desire.

was this copy and pasted from reddit.com/r/incels

[maddogmj77]

So? What is "sexism"? And why is it bad?

Thinking that Women & Men deserve different treatments simply because of their gender.

A mother's place is in the home. It is the man's responsibility to provide for his wife, not vice versa.

You may think that's "old-fashioned", but really it's just sexist.

You're saying Women should never have to work, and that Men should have to provide all the money for their wives. That's discriminatory, that's sexist.

Bad behavior should not be rewarded. In the case of a widow or desertion victim with children, yes, she should make more than a single person.

Or, how about we pay everyone equally, and quit it with the "gender role" bullshit.

Let people do whatever they wanna do, whether it be raising children, working a job, or some combination of that with a partner.
Your idea puts single moms & lesbian couples at a disadvantage, while greatly benefiting single men and gay couples. That's sexist.

Just pay everyone equally and everything works out fine.

The vast majority of women throughout history have been perfectly content with motherhood.

No. Actually, when you pay men more, & say "Women's place is in the home". You create a dynamic where Women are completely dependent on their husbands financially.
They will choose not to leave them, because they can't support themselves financially otherwise.

This means husbands are free to abuse, rape, do whatever to their wives, and they can't really leave because they wouldn't be able to support themselves.
This is what happened with my Grandma, who stayed with my abusive Grandpa, cause she couldn't make enough money on her own.

Your idea creates a really shitty situation, and leads to soooo many problems, while being extremely sexist against Women

[Arkansasguy]

Thinking that Women & Men deserve different treatments simply because of their gender.

Okay. Now explain why "sexism", so defined, is a bad thing.

Let people do whatever they wanna do, whether it be raising children, working a job, or some combination of that with a partner.

What people want to do is highly dependent on social conditioning. Moreover,
an economy which upholds equal pay as a principle will make it financially impossible for most mothers to stay at home.

No.

Prove it.

[maddogmj77]

Okay. Now explain why "sexism", so defined, is a bad thing.

Because people should be able to do what they want, not what you you tell them.
[I.E. Work a job, pursue a career, Stay at home with kids]

What people want to do is highly dependent on social conditioning. Moreover,
an economy which upholds equal pay as a principle will make it financially impossible for most mothers to stay at home.
Except that people are still doing it if they really want to.
And Equal pay is already law.

You're trying to make a choice for an entire gender. You don't get to do that...

Some women wanna be able to pursue their career; Some men wanna be able to stay home with their kids.
It's up to them to make that decision, not you.

Prove it.
I already gave you an anecdote of my own grandparents. But there's also the increasing divorce rate. Which is believed to be linked to Women being able to be financially independent now more so than ever.

[Arkansasguy]

Because people should be able to do what they want, not what you you tell them.
[I.E. Work a job, pursue a career, Stay at home with kids]

What possible relation is there between this assertion and the definition of sexism you gave, namely "thinking that Women & Men deserve different treatments simply because of their gender"? How much and what type of freedom of action people can have has only a tangential relation to whether or not people are treated differently on the basis of gender (e.g. there have been many totalitarian states that were explicitly gender egalitarian).

I understand that you are not actually thinking about the position that I hold, but are simply reacting emotionally to a viewpoint that offends you. Nevertheless, you should at least try to appear logical.

Except that people are still doing it if they really want to.

What people want and how strongly they want it is highly dependent on social conditioning. In any case, having to go into massive debt, which is the only way most people today could afford to have only one provider, is an unreasonable imposition. I'm sure you wouldn't accept it if a freedom that you cared about were under discussion.

But there's also the increasing divorce rate.

The increasing divorce rate shows the human suffering inflicted by the modern setup. Divorce today is much more common than abuse ever was.

[maddogmj77]

What possible relation is there between this assertion and the definition of sexism you gave, namely "thinking that Women & Men deserve different treatments simply because of their gender"? How much and what type of freedom of action people can have has only a tangential relation to whether or not people are treated differently on the basis of gender (e.g. there have been many totalitarian states that were explicitly gender egalitarian).
Because you think that Men & Women should be treated differently and forced into certain roles. You believe that Men should be paid more, and that Women should stay at home with kids.

That pretty much forces Men to work, because they'll make the most money.
It will also make most Women house-bound because they won't make as much money.

Gay couples & Single dads will be extremely well off.
Lesbian couples & Single moms won't be able to sustain themselves.

How is that fair?

What you are suggesting limits freedom, and forces people into roles based simply on their gender. People should make these choices for themselves; Not have them forced onto them.

I understand that you are not actually thinking about the position that I hold, but are simply reacting emotionally to a viewpoint that offends you. Nevertheless, you should at least try to appear logical.
I am thinking about the position you hold, and what I'm saying is that it forces people into certain roles just because of their gender. That's not right. People should make these choices for themselves.

You're the one that believes Men & Women should hold certain "roles" in life, and that "Men should be paid more", because "A women's place is in the home."
Go ahead and tell me that's not emotional reasoning.

Men & Women should be able to do what 'they' want, with no respect to their gender.
They should be able to pursue their career if they want to.
They should be able to stay at home with their kids if they want to.

What if I told you that you had to stay at home forever because your spouse got paid more at their job because of their gender, and you needed to watch the kids?
And that you weren't able to leave them because you can't find a job that pays enough to support yourself?

I bet you wouldn't like that role forced on you, would you?

So stop forcing it onto others.

The increasing divorce rate shows the human suffering inflicted by the modern setup. Divorce today is much more common than abuse ever was.
Actually, an increasing divorce rate means that people are able to leave bad marriages that aren't working. That's a good thing.
I would rather see an increase in divorce rates, than an increase in bad marriages which people can't leave. (Abuse or otherwise)

[Arkansasguy]

Because you think that Men & Women should be treated differently and forced into certain roles. You believe that Men should be paid more, and that Women should stay at home with kids.

That pretty much forces Men to work, because they'll make the most money.
It will also make most Women house-bound because they won't make as much money.

Any system will force people to live within certain limits, if they want to be financially well off anyway.

Single moms won't be able to sustain themselves.

"Single moms" is an equivocal term. There is no reason to treat single mothers who are such as a result of their own bad behavior (fornication or deserting their spouse) the same as widows and desertion victims.

Actually, an increasing divorce rate means that people are able to leave bad marriages that aren't working. That's a good thing.
I would rather see an increase in divorce rates, than an increase in bad marriages which people can't leave. (Abuse or otherwise)

The fact that someone doesn't feel happy isn't a justification for abandoning their spouse. Such behavior is extremely selfish, especially if there are children involved.

Abuse is a factor in only a small number of divorces.

[maddogmj77]

Any system will force people to live within certain limits, if they want to be financially well off anyway.
Only your system will force people into hetero-normative patriarchal gender roles in order to survive.

"Single moms" is an equivocal term. There is no reason to treat single mothers who are such as a result of their own bad behavior (fornication or deserting their spouse) the same as widows and desertion victims.
"Fornicating" & "Deserting" does not deserve the punishment of being unable to survive from your own wage. (Or any punishment for that matter)

How about Single Women who don't have a husband? How about Lesbian couples? Just fuck them, right?

The fact that someone doesn't feel happy isn't a justification for abandoning their spouse. Such behavior is extremely selfish, especially if there are children involved.
If a marriage isn't working out, then it's best to end it, not prolong suffering.
It's absolutely disgusting to force people into a life-long commitment they can never end just because someone's feelings might be hurt.

[Arkansasguy]

Only your system will force people into hetero-normative patriarchal gender roles in order to survive.

And why is that worse than any other imposition?

How about Single Women who don't have a husband?

Their cost of living will be less than that of a family.

It's absolutely disgusting to force people into a life-long commitment

No one is talking about forcing anyone to get married.

[maddogmj77]

And why is that worse than any other imposition?
Because Gay people exist.
Because Lesbian people exist.
Because Women who want to live on their own exist.

Because people deserve to make their own choices, and not be forced into your patriarchal gender roles.

Their cost of living will be less than that of a family.
And Lesbian couples? Single moms?

No one is talking about forcing anyone to get married.
You kinda are.
Single men will be paid more and be comfortable living on their own.
Single women will be paid less and not be able to live so easily.

You're making Women get married to men just so they'll have enough money to live comfortably.
That's fucked...

That completely fucks over Lesbian couples, single moms, and makes it much more difficult for Women to live on their own.


You don't seem too keen on giving up your idealized Hetero-normative Patriarchal Gender Roles. Best if we just end here.

[Arkansasguy]

Because Gay people exist.
Because Lesbian people exist.

Bums exist too. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them being required to work to earn a living.

And Lesbian couples? Single moms?

I have already explained the equivocation involved in the use of the term "single mom", your continued use of it indicates your dishonesty.

As for lesbians and promiscuous women, bad behavior should not be rewarded, nor should anyone else be burdened with the cost of their mistakes.

Single men will be paid more . . .
Single women will be paid less

If you want anyone to respect you, you should refrain from lying about what your debate opponent has said. If you wish to show that your position is cogent, you should address the position actually proposed, not one which you have imagined.

[Uniquemind]

Bums exist too. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them being required to work to earn a living.



I have already explained the equivocation involved in the use of the term "single mom", your continued use of it indicates your dishonesty.

As for lesbians and promiscuous women, bad behavior should not be rewarded, nor should anyone else be burdened with the cost of their mistakes.



If you want anyone to respect you, you should refrain from lying about what your debate opponent has said. If you wish to show that your position is cogent, you should address the position actually proposed, not one which you have imagined.

That doesn't really solve anything, at the end of the day they still exist.

Is it am underlying premise that with enough "suffering" those types of people would develop the will to "reform" or rather "conform" to society's standards is completely without virtue.

It's without merit and virtue because it doesn't work that way in the real world.

If you embrace this hypothetically, and historically we have, you see the abuses generations past endure and in some cases still do in other parts of the world.


You effectively add these subgroups into a segment of society that doesn't stimulate the economy, become homeless which drags the monetary quality of living down in a city or town, are more likely to be human trafficked or abused for unpaid or underpaid labor, and grow up stunted if their adult caretakers pass away (car crash, health condition etc...)

Look at what's going on with the sex scandals in Hollywood, a paid job even, and the it's still problems due to the existing power structures!

[Arkansasguy]

That doesn't really solve anything, at the end of the day they still exist.

Is it am underlying premise that with enough "suffering" those types of people would develop the will to "reform" or rather "conform" to society's standards is completely without virtue.

It's without merit and virtue because it doesn't work that way in the real world.

Lol. Rates of illegitimacy and homosexual behavior decades ago show that it does in fact work.

[Uniquemind]

Lol. Rates of illegitimacy and homosexual behavior decades ago show that it does in fact work.

Or it implies those portions of society were living underground, or suppressing those urges to great unhappiness back then for fear of retribution. But my point, always present in existence, and understudied.

The past did not ask a lot of questions, they just took beliefs at face value because previously established beliefs and morals were pushed on them. It wasn't until late 80's 90's around a response to the AID's crisis did people start thinking more comprehensively in more liberal parts of America.

Certainly our generation is more accepting and less judgmental than those of our grandparents.

[Arkansasguy]

Or it implies those portions of society were living underground, or suppressing those urges to great unhappiness back then for fear of retribution. But my point, always present in existence, and understudied.

That's a nice story you've told yourself.

There's no evidence for it though.

[Uniquemind]

That's a nice story you've told yourself.

There's no evidence for it though.

There is a lot of evidence from testimonials and hate crime statistics, but I digress.

But on the equal pay issue, their is truth to both sides. There have been cases where two basic retail store employees at the same level have a $1-5 pay differences and one is a male and the other is a female. None, had kids.

So there really wasn't an excuse. I remember it made the news back in the 2014 election cycle but was overshadowed by other stories deemed higher priority (weather events, mass tragedies).

Those stories happened and in this one both got fired because they disclosed their pay information, a violation of their employment NDA terms and conditions.

[Babs]

That's a nice story you've told yourself.

There's no evidence for it though.

where's the sauce for anything you have said in this thread tho

[Arkansasguy]

where's the sauce for anything you have said in this thread tho

Such as?

[Uniquemind]

Such as?

Such as rates of illegitimacy and homosexuals, having a direct connection and causation to the past "suffering" they endured to those behaviors not existing or at least as I counter argued not being expressed openly.


But regarding the equal pay argument, I just offered a direct example within 6 years of timeframe, and it seems to have been brushed off.

[Arkansasguy]

Such as rates of illegitimacy and homosexuals, having a direct connection and causation to the past "suffering" they endured to those behaviors not existing or at least as I counter argued not being expressed openly.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr48/nvs48_16.pdf (graph on the first page)

Illegitimacy has skyrocketed over the last 50 years.

But regarding the equal pay argument, I just offered a direct example within 6 years of timeframe, and it seems to have been brushed off.

I didn't address it because whether or not there presently exists a wage gap is not particularly interesting to me.

[Dalcourt]

I didn't address it because whether or not there presently exists a wage gap is not particularly interesting to me.

Sorry but I'm at a loss here,if you are not interested in whether wage gaps exist why do you take part in a discussion about equal pay?


Anyway...what I want to learn about this issue from people claiming pay isn't equal here. I understand that there are differences in pay for males and females. And I see that females work more part time due to the fact that they usually have to care for the kids and all. That they often don't get the promotion a male gets either because the female isn't as prepared to ask for it ... or the company wants to give the job to the male since there isn't the risk he will be away due to a pregnancy or so. I don't wanna repeat all those things here.

What I was always wondering is do companies really pay a different wage for the same job, same working hours at the same qualifications?
Are there proves this happens? And how is this justified by the company in question? What industries or companies do that?
If the female works part time sure she gets less than the male who works full time in the same job but the pay per hour should be the same,right? Is there really a difference in the money per hours? Since that would be the key issue here.
All the other things mentioned are social factors stemming from gender roles attributed by society. They basically don't have anything to do with the companies.

[Uniquemind]

Sorry but I'm at a loss here,if you are not interested in whether wage gaps exist why do you take part in a discussion about equal pay?


Anyway...what I want to learn about this issue from people claiming pay isn't equal here. I understand that there are differences in pay for males and females. And I see that females work more part time due to the fact that they usually have to care for the kids and all. That they often don't get the promotion a male gets either because the female isn't as prepared to ask for it ... or the company wants to give the job to the male since there isn't the risk he will be away due to a pregnancy or so. I don't wanna repeat all those things here.

What I was always wondering is do companies really pay a different wage for the same job, same working hours at the same qualifications?
Are there proves this happens? And how is this justified by the company in question? What industries or companies do that?
If the female works part time sure she gets less than the male who works full time in the same job but the pay per hour should be the same,right? Is there really a difference in the money per hours? Since that would be the key issue here.
All the other things mentioned are social factors stemming from gender roles attributed by society. They basically don't have anything to do with the companies.


It's one of those grey areas to be honest because to get such data you have blocks regarding privacy laws and Non-disclosure agreements. So when lawsuits like these begin, usually you have to sue the company for information.

It is also of note that hours given to part time employee, differ from full time not just in time awarded, but also in the rate of pay and that is worked out on an individual basis between the company heads (owner, or higher up in the Human Resources Dept.)

If you are a female entrepreneur, you do encounter a lot of sexist comments and expectations (reference: #MeToo movement as evidence in multiple industries) especially when starting out seeking for venture capital money to launch a business off the ground.

[maddogmj77]

Dalcourt
Right 'before' he compared Homosexuals to Bums is when I gave up, glad I did. He is completely unwilling to rethink his beliefs; No point.

[Enter your username]

Well what's wrong with having a man do the housekeeping and the woman work? I mean, if both the wife and husband are passionate about things that differ from this restraining gender role, well why not? If they both like their jobs, it should be fine.

Moreover, people have their own reasons in divorcing so in those cases you should not interfere negatively - life's already so hard for them, and coming back to a husband which she cannot love or making the same mistake with her ex-husband would not be an option.

Also, being a lesbian would be a personal choice which certainly would not affect work productivity. Such a conviction would be discriminatory.

On the logical side, a person should only get paid more or less where work productivity, effort, punctuality and participation is involved. So if anyone is absent from work, whether they are a man or woman, let them compensate with not being paid (on that day), not with consistently being paid LESS!

It is such an outrageous notion for this to be determined with archaic gender roles....

And Arkansasguy, if you were married as a gay couple, would you like to be paid less?

[maddogmj77]

Arkansasguy, if you were married as a gay couple, would you like to be paid less?

*Statement does not apply to me* *Does not compute! Does not compute!*

[Babs]

veering away from this really dumb irrelevant discussion we've spiraled into, i just want to put it out there once more that y'all can quote me with a link to a study regarding men and women working the same position in the same industry.

the wage gap is an interesting statistic, but it's not some conspiracy by corporate america to keep women down, nor is it some kind of epidemic of woman hating. women aren't just paid less for no reason.