Great video on the Gender pay gap

Hector Savage · 16-04-2018 4:48pm #1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7GWHgVZJQU

CulptPrit · 18-04-2018 12:41pm

Just what I always expected. At least Donald Trump wouldn't talk bull**** on this matter, unlike Trudeau.

The question is, can the government really force equal pay. Businesses will find away around it, right? I hear many companies avoid this by setting up partner companies where they place there top staff.

And why aren't such feminists labelled 'conspiracy theorists'?

Maxpfizer · 19-04-2018 12:26pm

CulptPrit wrote: »

Just what I always expected. At least Donald Trump wouldn't talk bull**** on this matter, unlike Trudeau.

The question is, can the government really force equal pay. Businesses will find away around it, right? I hear many companies avoid this by setting up partner companies where they place there top staff.

And why aren't such feminists labelled 'conspiracy theorists'?

The government won't have to force equal pay because businesses will embrace it.

Consider that any business boasting a Gender Pay Gap of zero will almost certainly be paying a majority of it's employees minimum wage AND will be making it more difficult for employees to increase their earnings.

They'll get a massive pat on the back for it too. Nobody is going to berate a large corporation for not giving out pay raises but they certainly will sing their praises if there's no "pay gap".

Most businesses are all about that "good PR" these days too.

Consider a situation like this.

Jack and Jill start a new job on the same day. Their employer is only paying the minimum wage. Every year the management give Jack and Jill a pay raise. It might only be 1 pound an hour but that all adds up.

Jack and Jill do the same job, work the same hours, perform the exact same tasks. After 10 years in the job they are up a full 10 pounds an hour compared to when they started.

They company gets so much praise for their "Zero Pay Gap".

However, Jill decides one day to leave the company. She wants to move to Australia or pursue further education or even raise kids. It doesn't really matter.

Now, the company brings in new employee Jane.

For the first year Jack and Jane do the same job, work the same hours and do the same tasks. Jack earns more though.

The company is literally paying Jack more money for equal work. That's a fact. There's a reason for that but you already know we are going to ignore the reasons.

The company does it's annual Gender Pay Gap report and, Dun Dun Dun, for the first time in a decade they have a Gender Pay Gap.

Jane is pissed and she takes to Twitter. She just wants equal pay for equal work.

The company could solve this problem and be a media darling once again next year by:

A: Letting current employee Jack go and bringing in new employee Jim on minimum wage.
B: Giving Jane a massive pay raise based not on loyalty to the company but gender.
C: Force current employee Jack to take pretty demoralizing pay cut.

Over time companies will learn that the best way to not fall foul of the Gender Pay Gap is to pay all employees minimum wages and restrict their ability to increase their pay.

Or at least they will have strict wage "levels" and strict rules on gender balance within those levels. There would be restrictions on the ability to move between levels.

People will always try to link Feminism to Communism and if you squint a little here you can almost see that starting to take shape.

Build the Gender Pay Gap up as a big thing. Punish companies that don't keep a pay gap of zero (either legally or in the court of public opinion). What's the logical conclusion?

Pay everyone the same? Don't pay people in money but rather just give the people what they need and no more?

Forget paying each according to their ability/loyalty/experience? Let's pay each according to their needs?

cantdecide · 19-04-2018 1:50pm

https://youtu.be/7VAZx07rOKU?t=8m10s

Warren Farrell is a former directors of the National Organization for Women in New York and an expert on the gender pay gap and wrote Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap--and what Women Can Do about it.

In this video he conducts an experiment to demonstrate the additional sacrifices men generally make in terms of their careers vs family life to indicate why they work and earn more and why women have better work/ life balance.

H3llR4iser · 19-04-2018 5:21pm

Maxpfizer wrote: »

A: Letting current employee Jack go and bringing in new employee Jim on minimum wage.
B: Giving Jane a massive pay raise based not on loyalty to the company but gender.
C: Force current employee Jack to take pretty demoralizing pay cut.

Chances are, unless Jack is an absolutely key figure in the business, they'll just fire him, hire Jim an then implement the "no pay rise" policy.

There's another scenario though - Jill stays with the company and Jack is the one leaving to go open an Ice Cream parlor in Greenland or something like that. They bring in Jim, who will earn considerably less than Jill. When the "Gender Pay Gap Report" time comes around, the company has what is now called a "negative pay gap" - will that be a problem too? One would assume it will be...and if Jim realizes that and complains, will he just be told to "do a better job and earn a rise"?

EDIT - I wrote this before watching the video. This lady speaks with the light of reason, it's a rarity nowadays. I've always supported her point that "feminists" do nothing other than paint women as weak, incapable "victims" unable to face the consequences of their own choices, and that need "protection". Children, basically, where the premises should be the exact opposite.

It's extremely telling that the interviewer, at some point, goes "this is not what we were looking for, we can't use this!". If there ever was a doubt about the media being one of the foremost (if not the main) culprits for only giving "airtime" to a specific, extremist, delusional and frankly idiotic side of the discussion, this pretty much nails it down with a neon sign for signpost...

Odelay · 19-04-2018 8:44pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7GWHgVZJQU

https://youtu.be/J7GWHgVZJQU

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.

CulptPrit · 19-04-2018 9:19pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Chances are, unless Jack is an absolutely key figure in the business, they'll just fire him, hire Jim an then implement the "no pay rise" policy.

There's another scenario though - Jill stays with the company and Jack is the one leaving to go open an Ice Cream parlor in Greenland or something like that. They bring in Jim, who will earn considerably less than Jill. When the "Gender Pay Gap Report" time comes around, the company has what is now called a "negative pay gap" - will that be a problem too? One would assume it will be...and if Jim realizes that and complains, will he just be told to "do a better job and earn a rise"?

EDIT - I wrote this before watching the video. This lady speaks with the light of reason, it's a rarity nowadays. I've always supported her point that "feminists" do nothing other than paint women as weak, incapable "victims" unable to face the consequences of their own choices, and that need "protection". Children, basically, where the premises should be the exact opposite.

It's extremely telling that the interviewer, at some point, goes "this is not what we were looking for, we can't use this!". If there ever was a doubt about the media being one of the foremost (if not the main) culprits for only giving "airtime" to a specific, extremist, delusional and frankly idiotic side of the discussion, this pretty much nails it down with a neon sign for signpost...

I'm amazed at how stupid people can be to buy into this. Would this have been tolerated 20 years ago? If people won't listen to an argument takes more than 20 seconds to make, then it will be very hard to win over the feminists. Does one always have to talk to people as if they're stupid in order to win a debate?

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.

I always considered channel 4 news to be good. But this gender pay issue is one of the problems I have with it at the moment

Franz Von Peppercorn · 25-04-2018 12:22pm

Maxpfizer wrote: »

The government won't have to force equal pay because businesses will embrace it.

Consider that any business boasting a Gender Pay Gap of zero will almost certainly be paying a majority of it's employees minimum wage AND will be making it more difficult for employees to increase their earnings.

They'll get a massive pat on the back for it too. Nobody is going to berate a large corporation for not giving out pay raises but they certainly will sing their praises if there's no "pay gap".

Most businesses are all about that "good PR" these days too.

Consider a situation like this.

Jack and Jill start a new job on the same day. Their employer is only paying the minimum wage. Every year the management give Jack and Jill a pay raise. It might only be 1 pound an hour but that all adds up.

Jack and Jill do the same job, work the same hours, perform the exact same tasks. After 10 years in the job they are up a full 10 pounds an hour compared to when they started.

They company gets so much praise for their "Zero Pay Gap".

However, Jill decides one day to leave the company. She wants to move to Australia or pursue further education or even raise kids. It doesn't really matter.

Now, the company brings in new employee Jane.

For the first year Jack and Jane do the same job, work the same hours and do the same tasks. Jack earns more though.

The company is literally paying Jack more money for equal work. That's a fact. There's a reason for that but you already know we are going to ignore the reasons.

The company does it's annual Gender Pay Gap report and, Dun Dun Dun, for the first time in a decade they have a Gender Pay Gap.

Jane is pissed and she takes to Twitter. She just wants equal pay for equal work.

The company could solve this problem and be a media darling once again next year by:

A: Letting current employee Jack go and bringing in new employee Jim on minimum wage.
B: Giving Jane a massive pay raise based not on loyalty to the company but gender.
C: Force current employee Jack to take pretty demoralizing pay cut.

Over time companies will learn that the best way to not fall foul of the Gender Pay Gap is to pay all employees minimum wages and restrict their ability to increase their pay.

Or at least they will have strict wage "levels" and strict rules on gender balance within those levels. There would be restrictions on the ability to move between levels.

People will always try to link Feminism to Communism and if you squint a little here you can almost see that starting to take shape.

Build the Gender Pay Gap up as a big thing. Punish companies that don't keep a pay gap of zero (either legally or in the court of public opinion). What's the logical conclusion?

Pay everyone the same? Don't pay people in money but rather just give the people what they need and no more?

Forget paying each according to their ability/loyalty/experience? Let's pay each according to their needs?

D) could be to hire a guy on minimum wage leaving no gender pay gap.

Good point though.

iptba · 25-04-2018 3:39pm

Half of organisations want regulation to boost gender diversity

It is particularly noteworthy that the research - carried out among more than 150 senior leaders across a range of indigenous, multinational and public sector organisations - found that of the 49pc in favour of regulation to address diversity, almost eight in 10 people said that they favour regulation to address gender diversity of boards.

Meanwhile nine in 10 people in this group said that they favoured legislation to address the gender pay gap.

"With gender pay gap legislation on the government agenda, it's encouraging to see that many Irish businesses are supportive of the move," Olivia McEvoy, director of diversity and inclusion advisory service at EY Ireland, said.

From:
https://www.independent.ie/business/world/half-of-organisations-want-regulation-to-boost-gender-diversity-36841815.html

johnnyskeleton · 26-04-2018 10:35am

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Consider a situation like this.

Jack and Jill start a new job on the same day. Their employer is only paying the minimum wage. Every year the management give Jack and Jill a pay raise. It might only be 1 pound an hour but that all adds up.

Jack and Jill do the same job, work the same hours, perform the exact same tasks. After 10 years in the job they are up a full 10 pounds an hour compared to when they started.

They company gets so much praise for their "Zero Pay Gap".

However, Jill decides one day to leave the company. She wants to move to Australia or pursue further education or even raise kids. It doesn't really matter.

Now, the company brings in new employee Jane.

Has already happened in real life:

https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2017/02/17/news/avoca-cafe-two-female-workers-win-equal-pay-claim-934954/

The male employee was paid more because he had extra qualifications, experience and had requested pay rises. The Equality Commission of Northern Ireland disregarded that and said that they were discriminating on the grounds of gender. Even a company like Avoca, which is about as far from a big capitalist patriarchy company as you can get, is a misogynist these days.

CulptPrit · 26-04-2018 12:25pm

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The male employee was paid more because he had extra qualifications, experience and had requested pay rises.

Well in the article, it just says he "had experience as a barista". Seems you exaggerated that. So presumably the company was asked if he was actually a better worker, and they might not have been able to prove so.

But if it were the reverse situation, would a male employee have the nerve to make a claim.

In this case, he should have kept his mouth shut.

aaakev · 26-04-2018 2:17pm

We will get to a situation where time served and loyalty to a company will mean nothing... its a race to the bottom

H3llR4iser · 26-04-2018 3:57pm

CulptPrit wrote: »

Well in the article, it just says he "had experience as a barista". Seems you exaggerated that. So presumably the company was asked if he was actually a better worker, and they might not have been able to prove so.

But if it were the reverse situation, would a male employee have the nerve to make a claim.

In this case, he should have kept his mouth shut.

That's theoretically going to happen at some point, and there's (still theoretically) no reason why it shouldn't be treated just the same way...

In reality, it's going to be interesting. My money is on the "work harder, get qualified, ask for a raise and be a man!" line being taken in these cases, but who knows, I hope I'll be proven wrong...

Sleepy · 26-04-2018 4:15pm

H3llR4iser wrote: »

It's extremely telling that the interviewer, at some point, goes "this is not what we were looking for, we can't use this!". If there ever was a doubt about the media being one of the foremost (if not the main) culprits for only giving "airtime" to a specific, extremist, delusional and frankly idiotic side of the discussion, this pretty much nails it down with a neon sign for signpost...

Isn't that all deliberate?

I'm pretty sure the "interviewer" is a political satirist...

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 4:19pm

cantdecide wrote: »

https://youtu.be/7VAZx07rOKU?t=8m10s

Warren Farrell is a former directors of the National Organization for Women in New York and an expert on the gender pay gap and wrote Why Men Earn More: The Startling Truth Behind the Pay Gap--and what Women Can Do about it.

In this video he conducts an experiment to demonstrate the additional sacrifices men generally make in terms of their careers vs family life to indicate why they work and earn more and why women have better work/ life balance.

I was just thinking of a conversation that I had with an Irish woman in her 60's.
She was talking about the gap today and recounted her own experiences.
She said that when she was a young woman working, men doing the same job, same length of time, were paid a huge amount more than her. Sexism was abound at that time, even more than now, so women were paid leas for same work.

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 4:23pm

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.

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

The BBC recently got into trouble for paying its male journalists much more than female.

Fourteen women have given written testimonies to an investigation on discrimination. What do you think of that?

o1s1n · 26-04-2018 4:26pm

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I was just thinking of a conversation that I had with an Irish woman in her 60's.
She was talking about the gap today and recounted her own experiences.
She said that when she was a young woman working, men doing the same job, same length of time, were paid a huge amount more than her. Sexism was abound at that time, even more than now, so women were paid leas for same work.

The main take from that being that you were talking to a woman in her 60s about her work life in times gone.

Things have changed dramatically in the interim for females in the workplace. To the point where they are outpacing and performing men in many fields. This older ladies perspective, while I'm sure was interesting to hear, has nothing to do with the current situation.

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 4:29pm

o1s1n wrote: »

The main take from that being that you were talking to a woman in her 60s about her work life in times gone.

Things have changed dramatically in the interim for females in the workplace. To the point where they are outpacing and performing men in many fields. This older ladies perspective, while I'm sure was interesting to hear, has nothing to do with the current situation.

Did you read my post right after?
You are incorrect.
The BBC incident, with 14 women complaining about gender pay discrimination against the BBC is very current.

There are also hundreds of other recent stories. Surely you are aware of these ?

o1s1n · 26-04-2018 4:30pm

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Did you read my post right after?
You are incorrect.
The BBC incident, with 14 women complaining about gender pay discrimination against the BBC is very current.

There are also hundreds of other recent stories. Surely you are aware of these ?

Just because there are some stories about people being paid less doesn't mean there's a global gender pay gap. It's a massive leap to infer one from the other.

Did you watch the video in the OP?

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 4:37pm

o1s1n wrote: »

Just because there are some stories about people being paid less doesn't mean there's a global gender pay gap. It's a massive leap to infer one from the other.

Did you watch the video in the OP?

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.

source · 26-04-2018 4:41pm

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.

You do realise that the BBC report that you're referring to resulted in more men getting pay rises across the organisation than women?

Edit: Here's a link before I'm asked for it: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-pay-review-will-give-men-more-rises-than-women-plsgjpf6z

iptba · 26-04-2018 5:09pm

Appledreams15 wrote: »

I was just thinking of a conversation that I had with an Irish woman in her 60's.
She was talking about the gap today and recounted her own experiences.
She said that when she was a young woman working, men doing the same job, same length of time, were paid a huge amount more than her. Sexism was abound at that time, even more than now, so women were paid leas for same work.

It was legal to pay men and women different rates in Ireland many decades ago as I understand it. It was at the same time as the marriage ban. The thinking was to ensure as many families as possible had someone earning a decent wage.

That is very different to the situation now.

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 5:13pm

iptba wrote: »

It was legal to pay men and women different rates in Ireland many decades ago as I understand it. It was at the same time as the marriage ban. The thinking was to ensure as many families as possible had someone earning a decent wage.

That is very different to the situation now.

Yes, and both favoured men, and both were inherently sexist. The woman told me that she asked about it, but they wouldn't listen to her.

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 5:23pm

source wrote: »

You do realise that the BBC report that you're referring to resulted in more men getting pay rises across the organisation than women?

Edit: Here's a link before I'm asked for it: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-pay-review-will-give-men-more-rises-than-women-plsgjpf6z

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.

As one woman said “The report would say that, wouldn’t it?” she told the BBC’s World at One. “This is a PwC report commissioned by the BBC and, without being overly cynical, I might venture to suggest that PwC has delivered the report the BBC has asked for.”

The National Union of Journalists, which has lodged a collective grievance about pay on behalf of more than 120 BBC employees, accused the broadcaster of “allowing a discriminatory pay culture to flourish” through a “serious lack of oversight”.

Appledreams15 · 26-04-2018 5:28pm

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.

26-04-2018 5:28pm

Appledreams15 wrote: »

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

Once again, I'm calling crap. I've worked professionally in Finance for small, medium, and corporate sized companies. In the vast majority of cases, my mid-level managers were female. In fact, out of the fifteen companies I worked for the Financial directors were female in more than half the companies.

Then we can look at the shareholders who are the actual owners of a public company, who vote on the policies and regulations of the company itself, and in many cases, actually have influence over what bonuses or commission are given out to employees, especially at higher positions within the organisation. Shareholders are both male and female.

I get tired of this stereotypical bullsht about gender politics in business, because it is bullsht. Women have had positions of influence/power within management for a bloody long time, and especially when we consider the numbers of women in areas such as administration, HR, etc they actually have more influence than most men in what happens. The top management positions are heavily populated with males, but those top managers/directors don't tend to control payroll, bonuses etc. They're concerned with increasing shareholder value.

I am so sick of this crap. Stop passing responsibility and own up to the fact that the female gender has been just as involved in the development of this, as men.

source · 26-04-2018 5:41pm

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.

As one woman said “The report would say that, wouldn’t it?” she told the BBC’s World at One. “This is a PwC report commissioned by the BBC and, without being overly cynical, I might venture to suggest that PwC has delivered the report the BBC has asked for.”

The National Union of Journalists, which has lodged a collective grievance about pay on behalf of more than 120 BBC employees, accused the broadcaster of “allowing a discriminatory pay culture to flourish” through a “serious lack of oversight”.

But you see this is the problem, no matter how many times the gender pay myth is debunked certain elements refuse to accept it and stick rigidly.

PWC are world renowned for their impartiality in these cases and have more to lose in reputational damage than they would have to gain in fudging this report.

What the report showed was that women were not unfairly underpaid, but rather that anyone not willing to our incapable of asking for more were taken advantage of and underpaid. Both men and women.

Omackeral · 26-04-2018 5:45pm

Appledreams15 wrote: »

Think of all that could be done if women were allowed to fully flourish! All that could be achieved. For both.

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

Odelay · 26-04-2018 6:53pm

aaakev wrote: »

We will get to a situation where time served and loyalty to a company will mean nothing... its a race to the bottom

It already means nothing.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 26-04-2018 11:46pm

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.

As one woman said “The report would say that, wouldn’t it?” she told the BBC’s World at One. “This is a PwC report commissioned by the BBC and, without being overly cynical, I might venture to suggest that PwC has delivered the report the BBC has asked for.”

The National Union of Journalists, which has lodged a collective grievance about pay on behalf of more than 120 BBC employees, accused the broadcaster of “allowing a discriminatory pay culture to flourish” through a “serious lack of oversight”.

You don’t do logic or understand empirical data. More men in the BBC got pay rises because more men were underpaid.

Of course what should have happened was pay cuts all around a more money for the beleaguered British worker and taxpayer.

heroics · 27-04-2018 7:51am

source wrote: »

But you see this is the problem, no matter how many times the gender pay myth is debunked certain elements refuse to accept it and stick rigidly.

This +1. In my experience most women I work with get approx same as the men doing the same role (some get a little more/some get a little less but thats the same for the guys in here as well) We all negotiate our own pay within a band for our role.

Statistics can be used in loads of ways for example in my team (IT Engineers) there are 12 guys and 1 women (the manager btw) Her base salary is more than any of ours. However if you add in the cleaning staff for example 4 women, if you compared the gender gap in our company there would probably be a large gap on paper but in reality the company pays the same bands for same work.

So purely for an example

Avg male = 60K
Avg women = ((1*70)+(4*20))=30K

OMG women get 1/2 the salary men do but that is just not reality. If any of the cleaners were men then they would also get the 20k salary and if any of the women had gone to college and had the same experience as the men they would get the 60K.

Sleepy · 27-04-2018 10:02am

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 · 27-04-2018 10:18am

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?

27-04-2018 10:38am

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 · 27-04-2018 12:51pm

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 · 29-04-2018 7:48pm

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 · 30-04-2018 8:10am

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 · 30-04-2018 11:59am

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 · 30-04-2018 12:09pm

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 · 02-05-2018 1:07pm

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 · 02-05-2018 1:19pm

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.

02-05-2018 2:53pm

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 · 03-05-2018 12:08am

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 · 03-05-2018 3:01pm

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 · 05-05-2018 6:26am

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 · 05-05-2018 6:32am

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 · 06-05-2018 8:56pm

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 · 06-05-2018 9:03pm

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 · 07-05-2018 11:35pm

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 · 28-05-2018 10:51pm

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 · 30-05-2018 1:15pm

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).

Great video on the Gender pay gap

Comments