Claims of gender-based pay discrimination are phony

[Chief_Pedant]

I note that President Obama is paid more than First Lady Obama.

When you take two fundamentally different cohorts of people you are never going to get equal average outcomes.

Nature discriminates; average outcomes follow.

We should try to ameliorate that where we can artificially, but there’s not a whole lot of surprise here.

Men. Women.

Biologically different cohorts.

[elfkin477]

@bengangmo

I don’t know of any company that explicitly pays women less than men - so both will be on the same salary for an entry level job.

They aren’t though. Women are already paid 18% less than men when both are just one year post-graduation. These are women who by and large have not yet had babies or taken time off for childcare or taking care of their aging parents (because their brothers won’t) or just don’t have the same length of experience as the men they’re compared to and the other excuses used to justify the gap.

Across all ages when you compare selected job titles for experience, length of work in the industry etc the gap shrinks to “only” 6.6%, which I’ve seen far too often dismissed as if it was no big deal, which is infuriating. As if any man wouldn’t be outraged to be informed tomorrow he’s getting a 6.6% pay cut for “unexplained” reasons that are related to his possession of male genitals.

[Gyrate]

@Chief_Pedant

I note that President Obama is paid more than First Lady Obama.

When you take two fundamentally different cohorts of people you are never going to get equal average outcomes.

Nature discriminates; average outcomes follow.

We should try to ameliorate that where we can artificially, but there’s not a whole lot of surprise here.

Men. Women.

Biologically different cohorts.

Huh. I’ve never seen subtext with a <BLINK> tag before.

[Bryan_Ekers]

I for one congratulate the OP for solving sexism.

[Lightnin]

More anecdata:

I work in the video games industry. My current company prides itself on its family values. We’ve got something like 250 employees at this particular studio, of which only about twenty are female. Of that 20, approximately half are in QA or office administrative positions, the jobs that tend to pay the least.

This company isn’t the exception. In every game job I’ve had, women are by far the minority.

[Shodan]

@Robert163

Take a step back and look at it again. Do you really not think a 74% discrepancy is not tied to some form of discrimination or perceived bias?

You will note in the OP that on average, the Obama administration is paying women 88% of what they pay men. Is that tied to some form of discrimination on the part of the White House?

Listen to the link that ITR champion provided where the press secretary fumbled his way thru a long example of special pleading where he tried to explain how, when we do it, it is not discrimination, but when somebody else does it, it is.

@ITR champion

If we just applied the same logic to the nation as a whole, we’d realize that the “pay gap” is not evidence of gender discrimination at all.

Which, obviously, is entirely correct.

Regards,
Shodan

[even_sven]

I say this every time, but all of these “choices” like taking time off to care for children are not something you can just separate out of the discussion. They are as important to discuss as anything else.

Let’s take children. When making the decision to take time off of work, these are factors:

1. Whose career has the most potential to grow? Who is bringing in the most now? How does that compare to childcare costs?
2. Does your company make it possible to breast feed? Is it acceptable to take breaks for pumping?
3. Is paternity leave offered? Is it acceptable to take? Is it acceptable for men to take their share of the days off for sick kids and the like?
4. Is maternity leave offered? Is it offered in quantities that the mother won’t end up with zero sick leave?

These things are a part of the conversation, not separate from it.

[puddleglum]

@Shodan

You will note in the OP that on average, the Obama administration is paying women 88% of what they pay men. Is that tied to some form of discrimination on the part of the White House?

Listen to the link that ITR champion provided where the press secretary fumbled his way thru a long example of special pleading where he tried to explain how, when we do it, it is not discrimination, but when somebody else does it, it is.
Regards,
Shodan

It is not going to get any better with a Hillary presidency. When she was in the Senate she paid her full time female staff 72% of what she paid her male full time staff.

[Shodan]

@puddleglum

It is not going to get any better with a Hillary presidency. When she was in the Senate she paid her full time female staff 72% of what she paid her male full time staff.

And ACORN paid employees less than minimum wage.

When I do it, it is for legitimate reasons and doesn’t count. When you do it, it is unfair discrimination.

Regards,
Shodan

[Little_Nemo]

@Shodan

You will note in the OP that on average, the Obama administration is paying women 88% of what they pay men.

@puddleglum

When she was in the Senate she paid her full time female staff 72% of what she paid her male full time staff.

88%? 72%? Well, which is it gentlemen?

I’m going to follow the rules of the OP. If two different numbers are mentioned, they must both be false and I’m declaring the issue therefore doesn’t exist.

[Shodan]

@Little_Nemo

88%? 72%? Well, which is it gentlemen?

It was 88% for Obama, and 72% for Hillary.

I’m going to follow the rules of the OP. If two different numbers are mentioned, they must both be false and I’m declaring the issue therefore doesn’t exist.

I am afraid you are not being logical. Different numbers referring to different things can both be correct. Different numbers referring to the same thing cannot both be correct.

Obama was referring to the same thing (overall pay differences) both with the 77% figure and the 81% figure. Therefore one is wrong (or both are wrong). Obviously different sexists can discriminate to different degrees - Hillary is more sexist and unfair than Obama, if one is gullible enough to take the figures at face value.

It’s too bad. Your posts are not often as stupid as this was.

Regards,
Shodan

[Trom]

Why doesn’t some smart person enter an extremely low margin business, hire tons of women, save 25% vs. the competition on fixed wage expenses, and dominate the industry?

If it were really that simple to pay women a fraction of what men are paid for exactly equal work, there would be red-blooded, Ayn Rand-worshipping capitalists scrambling to staff their companies with more women.

[CGav8r]

@Shodan

You will note in the OP that on average, the Obama administration is paying women 88% of what they pay men. Is that tied to some form of discrimination on the part of the White House?

Listen to the link that ITR champion provided where the press secretary fumbled his way thru a long example of special pleading where he tried to explain how, when we do it, it is not discrimination, but when somebody else does it, it is.
Which, obviously, is entirely correct.

Regards,
Shodan

Where did you get the 88%? Do you have a cite?

Are you maybe thinking 91% cited in this article?

[AK84]

My sister is in the same field as I am (law). I have more qualifications then her, went to better schools, and had better grades. I have 6 years more experience.

I make less than her. By quite a bit.

Is it because of discrimination? Or because she is in high level corporate transactional practice with a multi national law firm, and I choose to go into private practice on my own?

Issues like this need to be controlled for before you can make a determination.

[Gyrate]

@Shodan

It was 88% for Obama

Not really, unless you take a selective view of the data.

and 72% for Hillary.

And again: not really.

But while I’m citing Politifact:

The “doing the same work” line has tripped up some politicians in the past as they have tried to describe the 77-cent statistic, notably President Barack Obama.

During the 2012 campaign, Obama released a misleading ad that said, “Women (are) paid 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.”

The claim rates Mostly False. The Obama campaign cites a U.S. Census Bureau statistic showing average pay for men and women, but this number does not take into account the type of job, hours worked or length of tenure. In other words, it does not describe the wage gap when “doing the same work as men.”

Obama cast the statistic in a more accurate light in his 2014 State of the Union address: "You know, today, women make up about half our workforce, but they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment.

This time his claim rated Mostly True, as the Census Bureau figure is credible when presented as an average. However, the gap is not necessarily due to discrimination, and other calculations show a smaller overall wage gap.

So the OP, despite a certain amount of misrepresentation on some things, is in the right ballpark on other points.

[Procrustus]

Just to make one point clear, the** Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act **didn’t make unequal pay illegal, it was already illegal. It just made it easier (possible, in most cases) to bring a lawsuit when a woman found out she was being discriminated against. I tend to agree that economy-wide statistics about what “men” and “women” earn can be misleading, but Ms. Ledbetter actually has a legitimate case, but couldn’t bring it because Alito and his gang ruled there was a 180 day statute of limitations.

From Ginsberg’s dissent:

Lilly Ledbetter was a supervisor at Goodyear Tire and Rubber’s plant in Gadsden, Alabama, from 1979 until her retirement in 1998. For most of those years, she worked as an area manager, a position largely occupied by men. Initially, Ledbetter’s salary was in line with the salaries of men performing substantially similar work. Over time, however, her pay slipped in comparison to the pay of male area managers with equal or less seniority. By the end of 1997, Ledbetter was the only woman working as an area manager and the pay discrepancy between Ledbetter and her 15 male counterparts was stark: Ledbetter was paid $3,727 per month; the lowest paid male area manager received $4,286 per month, the highest paid, $5,236.

[Kobal2]

@Bryan_Ekers

I for one congratulate the OP for solving sexism.

It turned out they really didn’t have to worry their pretty little heads about it all along !

[Little_Nemo]

@Shodan

It was 88% for Obama, and 72% for Hillary.
I am afraid you are not being logical. Different numbers referring to different things can both be correct. Different numbers referring to the same thing cannot both be correct.

I mentioned the OP specifically so people would get the reference. He makes an issue out of the fact that one source says 77% and another says 81% and says “that certainly proves that Obama was wrong”.

To clear up the confusion, the 77% figure was from a 2010 report and the 81% figure was from a 2012 report. So there’s no inconsistency in the fact that they’re different.

There’s also no inconsistency in women getting paid less than men in the Obama administration or women getting paid less than men in Hillary Clinton’s office and the idea that women get paid less than men. In fact, it’s actually evidence that supports the claim. If you want to disprove the claim that women get paid less than men, then you should have provided examples of it not happening.

[Shodan]

@Little_Nemo

There’s also no inconsistency in women getting paid less than men in the Obama administration or women getting paid less than men in Hillary Clinton’s office and the idea that women get paid less than men. In fact, it’s actually evidence that supports the claim. If you want to disprove the claim that women get paid less than men, then you should have provided examples of it not happening.

Nobody is disputing that women are paid less than men. We are disputing Obama’s assertion that the discrepancy is due to discrimination, hurts families, and is ipso facto proof of sexism. If it is due to discrimination, correcting for other factors wouldn’t make it largely go away. If it hurts families, then why are Obama and Hillary hurting the families of their employees? And if it is proof of sexism, then Obama and Clinton are hypocrites.

I have no doubt that you recognize this - as I said, it is unfortunate that you choose to post as you have.

Regards,
Shodan

[Richard_Parker]

Like many issues of discrimination, central to the dispute over this one is the right-wing view that discrimination is only conscious bigotry (except when it comes to affirmative action, when they apply the broadest definition possible). Therefore, if the pay gap is due to, say, the expectation that a woman might take time off to care for kids, then that isn’t discriminatory.

But as even sven points out, there is a whole ecosystem of government, corporate, and cultural standards that contribute to women being the one to pay the caregiver tax on wages and future earnings. And those standards are, often, sexist. There’s no biological reason why women need to be given months more maternity leave than men, for example. But that one policy–among many–means that women will often be the one to choose to take a big gap in their work history because it’s more economically efficient for the family.

Conservatives simply don’t believe that is discrimination. And that’s part of the reason they tend to lose women.