Great video on the Gender pay gap

Sleepy

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Barclays bank have also revealed a huge pay disparity between men and women. Women earn 48% less than men, on average, at Barclays International.

That statistic, on it's own, means nothing.

If you can say that women working in position abc in Barclays International earn 48% less than men in position abc, you'll have a point. But you don't. Because you can't. Because, despite the feminist propoganda you're swallowing without applying any critical thinking to it, that situation doesn't exist.

Think about the differential between the salary of the CEO of an international financial house and the front-line bank clerks. You would probably need to add *two* zeroes to the clerks salary to match the CEO's (a separate issue but one I personally consider a negative aspect of capitalism). If that CEO is male (which due to the different choices men and women tend to make with regard to work/life balance, is likely) and a majority of the clerks are female (which, based on personal experience of working in a few bank branches over the years, they will be as it's a fairly handy number that rarely requires overtime and caters for family friendly flexible working setups such as job-sharing, term-time etc) there'll be a "gender pay gap".

There simply is no patriarchal conspiracy blocking women from attaining such top positions. In practice, it's often quite the reverse: companies love to promote women to the boardroom, it's great PR. The reality is that women (as a group) *choose* to limit their careers far more than their male conterparts and a sub-section of them, yourself included, then whine that those men who place more emphasis on their careers, work longer hours and take more risks are paid more than them.

Will I Am Not

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Barclays bank have also revealed a huge pay disparity between men and women. Women earn 48% less than men, on average, at Barclays International

All doing the same job and hours yeah?

In the building I'm in I'm pretty sure the cleaners get paid more than me despite my degree, conversion course and professional qualifications. It's not fair. Or it's that I'm inexperienced and value my time too much to go somewhere I could get a far higher wage. Take your pick. :P

Sonics2k

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Barclays bank have also revealed a huge pay disparity between men and women. Women earn 48% less than men, on average, at Barclays International.

We can all see that worldwide we need to improve the treatment of women in many areas. What i think men fail to see is when they hold women back, they also hold themselves back.
If you keep anyone weak, you do not have society at its fullest. Think of all that could be done if women were allowed to fully flourish! All that could be achieved. For both.

The extremely important thing to note here, is if the women are doing the exact same job as the men earning 48% more.

You have to do a like for like comparison of the role when looking at genders and pay gaps.

As an example.

Bank Manager A - works 50 hours a week, in the role for exactly 10 years
Bank Manager B - works 50 hours a week, in the role for exactly 10 years.

Both should be paid the same. That makes sense.

Bank Manager C - works 50 hours a week, in the role for 10 years.
Bank Manager D - works 50 hours a week, in the role for 5 years.

It makes more sense for C to earn more than D.

Bank Manager E - works 50 hours a week, in the role for 10 years, runs a massive bank smack in the middle of London City, one of the busiest in the country.
Bank Manager F - works 50 hours a week, in the role for 10 years, runs a small branch in Oakhampton, population of 5,000 people, so a very quiet place.

Again, it makes more sense for E to earn more than F.

You can't just throw out "x get's paid more than y" without doing proper, like for like comparisons.

Do men tend to earn more over the course of their careers, yes.
BUT, this is because men tend to start working younger, retire later, take less time off and typically tend to work in fields with a higher pay rate.

Eric Cartman

the reality of it is that almost any report concludes the childless women have an almost non existent pay gap in the professional sector these days,

people talking about the gender pay gap, when you boil it down, either have no idea how it works or are genuinely looking for women who take time out to have kids, leave early to get them from school, don't chase training and promotions because they're the primary carer for the kids etc... to end up at retirement time on the exact same salary as a man who more hours, dedicated all his time to his career, took every opportunity, did all the late nights and overtime and worked sick days.

some governments are suggesting mandatory paternity leave to knock men down a peg as a way to achieve it, others are suggesting gender quotas etc....

you will never find a woman who understands that you can have a stellar career or be a stellar mother always there for your kids, or the third option is you can be pretty good at both , but not stellar. You get to be CEO or mommy of the year, not both.

heroics

Eric Cartman wrote: »

you will never find a woman who understands that you can have a stellar career or be a stellar mother always there for your kids, or the third option is you can be pretty good at both , but not stellar. You get to be CEO or mommy of the year, not both.

My wife completely understands this. She would much rather be a better mother so has cut back on her hours etc. She fully understands and believes it is right that as a result of her choice she does not progress as quickly as men or women that don't make that choice.

Eric Cartman

heroics wrote: »

My wife completely understands this. She would much rather be a better mother so has cut back on her hours etc. She fully understands and believes it is right that as a result of her choice she does not progress as quickly as men or women that don't make that choice.

Sorry, it was actually phrased wrong, i keant to say "you will never find a woman complaining about the 'wage gap' who..." obviously there are women who very well understand this.

heroics

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Sorry, it was actually phrased wrong, i keant to say "you will never find a woman complaining about the 'wage gap' who..." obviously there are women who very well understand this.

Makes more sense

Maxpfizer

I'm not sure why the gap in pay needs to be broken down by gender at all?

If there are 4 employees in the same company but maybe with different levels of experience or different performance reviews and their pay is broken down as follows:

Man A: 50k per year
Woman A: 40K per year
Woman B: 35k per year
Man B: 30K per year.

The company has a "gender pay gap" of 2.5k, with "Men" earning 40k per year on average and "Women" earning 37.5k on average. The total earnings of "Men" is 5k more than the total earnings of "Women".

Why are we expected to ignore the fact that in a situation like this it's the individual Man B who is missing out here, earning significantly less than other employees?

Why are we listening to people who create the impression that Man B is somehow benefiting from Man A's inflated salary?

Why would governments implement policies that would deal with the discrepancy between the pay given to Man A and Women A&B but there is nothing at all to ensure that Man B is not helped at all?

For example, with the Barclays example cited earlier, if we took all of the women at Barclays out of the equation, are the men all being paid the same salary?

If not then what difference does it make to introduce the idea of what "Men" are being paid and what "Women" are being paid when all the men are not earning the same in the first place?

The only solution I could reasonably see here is that you'd have to pay all employees the exact same salary but I'm not sure that most of the people campaigning to get rid of the pay gap would be on board with this solution.

Maxpfizer

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Sometimes I think when men blatantly deny what is going on, they are actually ashamed of their gender's actions.

Definitely. When I see a male actor earning 10 million per movie and a female actor earning only 5 million per movie I often feel so ashamed at how a millionaire man is keeping down that millionaire woman. Thankfully, he throws me my 100k "man payment" once a year so I can live with it.

It was the same when I worked in minimum wage jobs. I used to look at all the minimum wage women and feel so ashamed that I was earning minimum wage and they were earning minimum wage too. Those women should be paid more because they are women.

When I look at rich men like Trump the only thing that keeps me going is the knowledge that so long as their are men making millions it doesn't matter how poor I am. Sure it is a little bit shameful but so long as "Team Men" is beating "Team Women" overall who really cares some men might have to sleep in a doorway, right?

Or maybe the only person who should feel ashamed is yourself for posting such utter tripe?

This is why what they call "Identity Politics" is so bad. It conditions people to deliberately ignore the potential problems faced by individuals because they belong to a group that is doing better on average.

Maxpfizer

Maxpfizer wrote: »

The only solution I could reasonably see here is that you'd have to pay all employees the exact same salary but I'm not sure that most of the people campaigning to get rid of the pay gap would be on board with this solution.

Except that unions, by their nature, would seek to change the salaries for their members. It's fine when there's only one union for everyone, but I once worked in a company that had 9 different unions depending on their position, along with a female only union. The Unions sought better benefits only for their members.

It's a gender issue because Feminism needs everything to be a gender issue so that they can remain relevant. Feminists need discrimination to exist, and when there isn't any real discrimination, they'll invent it. That's why the gender gap is so focused on Gender and more so, on averages. They don't want to acknowledge that there is a huge disparity between the salaries of women without children vs those with children, or even that women with better skills get paid better than those who don't improve themselves. Instead everything comes down to the gender, and reasons don't matter.

it's the us vs them mentality, and they want to encourage the idea of women as a singular body against the singular male body. Of course, it doesn't actually represent reality because in life you find many women who don't conform to the Feminist ideals. I have female friends who love being supported by their husbands, and who enjoy being "trophy" wives. They don't want to be equal in the same manner that feminists demand... and find the whole notion to be horrifying. However, their desires won't be acknowledged as being relevant, because feminism represents all women (whether they want to be represented or not)

py2006

Odelay wrote: »

She says it exactly as it is. Women can higher paid jobs if they want to work in a warehouse rather than shop floor was a perfect example. Also working extra hours, overtime etc. often it is a choice. If they don't work these roles or work the overtime, then don't be surprised if the annual pay is less. Same goes for men.

Yea, but you see....you now hate women for saying that. Don't ya know

PlaneSpeeking

py2006 wrote: »

Yea, but you see....you now hate women for saying that. Don't ya know

I have "internalised misogyny" apparently as I said there was no such thing as a gender pay gap - it was SOME women wanting to leave the workforce, have a break, and return on the same level of remuneration and conditions that someone who stayed and worked was on.

That is unfair!

py2006

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I have "internalised misogyny" apparently as I said there was no such thing as a gender pay gap - it was SOME women wanting to leave the workforce, have a break, and return on the same level of remuneration and conditions that someone who stayed and worked was on.

That is unfair!

Apparently that opinion makes you a patriarchal, woman hating, neanderthal who has fantasies about Trump.

PlaneSpeeking

py2006 wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I have "internalised misogyny" apparently as I said there was no such thing as a gender pay gap - it was SOME women wanting to leave the workforce, have a break, and return on the same level of remuneration and conditions that someone who stayed and worked was on.

That is unfair!

Apparently that opinion makes you a patriarchal, woman hating, neanderthal who has fantasies about Trump.

It's the sexy hair obviously!!!!

tritium

Appledreams15 wrote: »

yes but how can you say that the older woman's story is not relavent to today, when gender pay gap stories are very often reported in today's media. It is a current problem.

Martina Navratalova added to the report on the BBC discrimination case, saying that she was paid 15,000 in comparison to John McEnroe's 150,000 for the same commentary gigs, that she was lied to and told she was receiving the same as her male costars.

Of course it exists.
It would be like there being hundreds of incidents of racism documented in the media, and me saying it doesn't exist.

All these gender discrimination incidents have been reported, people have launched investigations , and they have all been documented in the media.

For clarity, Navratilova was NOT doing the same job as McEnroe. When this issue first came up their exact roles were forensically compared. Mcenroe did far more presenting, was required to effectively be on call, did a huge amount of promo style stuff. By comparison Navratilova did a small number of commentary roles.

They really picked a bad fight there. Shame that they’re still trying to spin it.

Royale with Cheese

McEnroe is also just a much bigger name than Navaratilova when it comes to his media career, I'm sure he gets paid more than most of his male colleagues too. He is the person viewers tune in to watch, therefore he can command a higher salary. Bringing gender into the equation on that one was fairly moronic.

iptba

Companies will be obliged to detail the difference in pay for male and female employees, under new plans being considered by the Government.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/government-to-make-employers-reveal-gender-pay-gaps-1.3486181

iptba

Firms fear fallout from pay gap audits

Gretchen Friemann

May 28 2018 2:30 AM

A survey of 67 large companies in Ireland shows most are concerned about the reputational risk of forced gender pay gap reporting, while a majority have yet to assess whether a discrepancy between male and female pay even exists.

The findings are contained in a new report by HR and employee benefits consultants Mercer, ahead of draft legislation aimed at promoting equal pay.

In April, the UK introduced mandatory reporting of gender pay gaps for organisations that employ at least 250 staff. Similar legislation may be ushered in here by the end of this year.

Continues at:
https://www.independent.ie/business/irish/firms-fear-fallout-from-pay-gap-audits-36952021.html

DEFTLEFTHAND

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

McEnroe is also just a much bigger name than Navaratilova when it comes to his media career, I'm sure he gets paid more than most of his male colleagues too. He is the person viewers tune in to watch, therefore he can command a higher salary. Bringing gender into the equation on that one was fairly moronic.

They don't seem to understand basic economic principles. Whether it's willful ignorance or not is debatable.

It's often highlighted when 3rd wave regressives argue over pay disparity in team games. They don't seem to comprehend that the reason why men are payed much more in the likes of soccer and basketball is because they draw huge revenue worldwide to justify it.

They seem to want the men's sport to subsidise their sports across the board (like what happens in tennis).

the_syco

Odelay wrote: »

She says it exactly as it is. Women can higher paid jobs if they want to work in a warehouse rather than shop floor was a perfect example.

As most such jobs will have in their job specifications that the person will be able to lift X amount of weight on a regular basis, not all women will be eligible for the job.

CulptPrit wrote: »

I think this is mainly a problem in Britain. Perhaps it's not so much a problem in the U.S. Trump certainly didn't feel as if he had to pretend to be in favour of equal pay, in order to win the election.

Min wage in the majority of states of the USA for service jobs is under $3 an hour, as tips make up the rest.

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Wouldn't it make sense if it's part of the culture? The women and other organisations on their behalf are still fighting it.
14 women complain about gender discrimination. They launch a report. It decides to give predominanyly male stars a pay rise.

You pretend to want equality, and you get equality. But you don't want equality. You want women to earn more. And thus are mad that the push to gain equality, gets equality, but just not the "equality" that you wanted? :pac:

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Barclays bank have also revealed a huge pay disparity between men and women. Women earn 48% less than men, on average, at Barclays International.

Of course, you don't include the hours worked by men, or their qualifications, when comparing their work to the work women do.

Omackeral wrote: »

What can women in Ireland in 2018 not do that men can do? Where are their inequalities? Who's holding them back exactly?

Generally, most jobs that require physical labour, such as binman, security, etc. Any job that requires physical strength. Have never seen a female bin person. Have seen some female security, but they're mostly well built, or have large figures if they have to deal with the public.

iptba wrote: »

Companies will be obliged to detail the difference in pay for male and female employees, under new plans being considered by the Government.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/government-to-make-employers-reveal-gender-pay-gaps-1.3486181

Can't see this ending well for those that are pushing it, tbh.

um7y1h83ge06nx

The gender pay gap debate as many have said does not dig into the details in almost all circumstances.

My wife would be another example they would love. When she goes back to a decent public sector HSE job soon after her maternity leave she will be earning less per year than her male colleagues in the same position on the same point in the salary scale. Burn them the crowd yells, blatant patriarchy!

So what's in the details here? Her and her male colleague with the exact same title and sitting in the same point on the salary scale will be earning exactly the same base salary. However my wife has being presented with the opportunity to remove herself from the on call and overtime rota for a year when it will be reviewed. She made the decision as she believes it would be better for her and us as a family to not be working nights and weekends. Completely her decision but I support it and thankfully right now we can afford that situation.

So yes she will be earning less per year than her colleague but he will be working and on call much more, working longer.

The gender pay gap debate is really nothing more in most cases than protectionism by feminists and an attempt to control a market. Trump is doing it with steel and aluminium now, they are trying to do it with labour.

Sleepy

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

They don't seem to understand basic economic principles. Whether it's willful ignorance or not is debatable.

I'm sure you'd find that the overlap between the Arts Students studying Economics, Maths or Statistics modules and those taking Feminism or Gender Studies would be extremely small.

iptba

Nicolas Strong Mafia wrote: »

My wife would be another example they would love. When she goes back to a decent public sector HSE job soon after her maternity leave she will be earning less per year than her male colleagues in the same position on the same point in the salary scale. Burn them the crowd yells, blatant patriarchy!

Jeremy Hunt vows to close NHS doctors gender pay gap

Health secretary Jeremy Hunt has launched a review into how NHS doctors are paid in a bid to close the 15% gender pay gap that exists.

The review will look at why male doctors employed by the NHS in England are paid on average £10,000 more than female doctors. Male doctors receive an average of £67,788 in basic pay, compared with £57,569 for female doctors – a difference of 15%.

https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/jeremy-hunt-vows-close-nhs-doctors-gender-pay-gap/


Another public sector area (in UK) where there is a significant pay gap. With salary scales and the like, it makes it much more likely that pay gaps are to do with comparing apples with oranges.

Royale with Cheese

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

They don't seem to understand basic economic principles. Whether it's willful ignorance or not is debatable.

It's often highlighted when 3rd wave regressives argue over pay disparity in team games. They don't seem to comprehend that the reason why men are payed much more in the likes of soccer and basketball is because they draw huge revenue worldwide to justify it.

They seem to want the men's sport to subsidise their sports across the board (like what happens in tennis).

Yes I think it is no coincidence that tennis was the sport involved here. The top female players used what can be a genuine issue in some workplaces (I'm not going to get into the rest of the debate around the genuineness of the gender pay gap) to browbeat the grand slams into giving equal prize money for fear of being labelled sexists. Outside of these tournaments the women's and men's tours are separate, and the prize money involved on the women's tour pales in comparison to the men's. Why? Because that's all they can afford to pay. Far less people want to watch women's tennis and therefore it generates less revenue to be shared out. All of the above is ignored in favour of "equality". I'm sure Navaratilova saw what women's tennis players had managed to achieve in this area and thought me too.

I can't say it particularly bothers me, what tennis players earn has no effect on my life. But the utter stupidity of ignoring any detail and saying penis/vagina need to be exactly the same just hurts my brain. By all means have a gender pay gap discussion and remove any genuinely unfair pay discrepancies that are found, but for god's sake don't just take the average or two figures and ignore EVERYTHING else involved.

iptba

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

Yes I think it is no coincidence that tennis was the sport involved here. The top female players used what can be a genuine issue in some workplaces (I'm not going to get into the rest of the debate around the genuineness of the gender pay gap) to browbeat the grand slams into giving equal prize money for fear of being labelled sexists. Outside of these tournaments the women's and men's tours are separate, and the prize money involved on the women's tour pales in comparison to the men's. Why? Because that's all they can afford to pay. Far less people want to watch women's tennis and therefore it generates less revenue to be shared out. All of the above is ignored in favour of "equality". I'm sure Navaratilova saw what women's tennis players had managed to achieve in this area and thought me too.

I can't say it particularly bothers me, what tennis players earn has no effect on my life. But the utter stupidity of ignoring any detail and saying penis/vagina need to be exactly the same just hurts my brain. By all means have a gender pay gap discussion and remove any genuinely unfair pay discrepancies that are found, but for god's sake don't just take the average or two figures and ignore EVERYTHING else involved.

I see Rafael Nadal spoke on this this week

Rafael Nadal: World no 1 sparks row with shock equal pay admission

RAFAEL NADAL says male tennis players should earn more money than female players because more people watch them play.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/971935/Rafael-Nadal-World-no-1-equal-pay-French-Open

PlaneSpeeking

iptba wrote: »

I see Rafael Nadal spoke on this this week

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/971935/Rafael-Nadal-World-no-1-equal-pay-French-Open

I've long argued that there is a blatant gender pay gap in favour of women in tennis.

I've seen a Wimbledon ladies' final done and dusted in less than an hour, yet the men's final lasted near four times as much - yet the pay was the same.

I think if memory serves the Australian Open in 2017 the men's winner (Roger Federer - greatest ever) played something like 300 games to win the title whilst Serena Williams played less than 120.

Damn matriarchy!!!!

Joe Dog

Appledreams15 wrote: »

yes but how can you say that the older woman's story is not relavent to today, when gender pay gap stories are very often reported in today's media. It is a current problem.

Martina Navratalova added to the report on the BBC discrimination case, saying that she was paid 15,000 in comparison to John McEnroe's 150,000 for the same commentary gigs, that she was lied to and told she was receiving the same as her male costars.

Of course it exists.
It would be like there being hundreds of incidents of racism documented in the media, and me saying it doesn't exist.

All these gender discrimination incidents have been reported, people have launched investigations , and they have all been documented in the media.

Because John McEnroe did an awful lot more work than her for the BBC and he's also almost certainly a bigger draw for viewers than she is as at least he has some personality and she has none.

iptba

I see the supposed gender gap has been brought up at the (Irish) disability law summer school:

https://twitter.com/firmatine/status/1009006178813272064

Lots of talk about gender and intersectionality at this event i.e. the view disabled women have it worse than disabled men

iptba

I don't know the background to this but there are lots of proposed measurements regarding "women":
https://twitter.com/MEIskenderian/status/1010193956011823104