How do you pronounce her first name?
I had originally heard it as Kuh Maw Luh. But this morning on NPR’s Morning Edition, two different reporters pronounced as rhyming with Pamela, but beginning with a K.
So which is it?
I’ve heard “KAH muh luh” – close to Pamela, but with the first syllable like “hot” rather than “hat”.
This article in Marie Claire: How to Pronounce Kamala Harris' Name Correctly | Marie Claire
say it is Comma Lah.
No one wants to discuss her proposal to fine companies that pay men more than women?
I’m for it.
Requiring companies to send in all their pay data, and assuming that the companies are guilty of discrimination until proven innocent, seems problematic to me.
I would hope that anyone with any sense, which may or may not include Ms. Harris, is aware that the alleged pay gap between men and women isn’t due to gender bias, but proving it over and over, especially to an organization that hopes to collect $18 billion a year if they decline to believe it, is unfortunately typical of a certain kind of thinking. Maybe she is thinking of how much easier her job as a prosecutor would have been if she could have shifted the burden of proof.
I wonder what Ms. Harris pays her campaign consultants. Maybe she’s learned something in the last few years.
Regards,
Shodan
In my understanding, the data suggests that the entirety of the pay gap is probably not due to gender bias, but parts of it still may be. Further, the gap may be influenced by things that are not directly “gender bias”, but are still related concepts – for example, if relatively few women choose a certain lucrative education or industry path because they discover that this path generally treats women poorly, then this could negatively affect their salaries, even if it’s not directly due to bias by their employer.
I concur. Most of the gender gap isnt due to gender bias, but as long as it is "same pay for same job with same qualifications’ I am good with that. I mean, we had a woman complaining she was getting paid less than me for example (she was half kidding, she didnt file a real complaint) until I pointed out I had 10 years a a higher degree than her.
That seems like a laughably stupid idea with little to no chance of coming to fruition. I interpret it as a sign she sees her campaign as not being successful currently and needing some way to spark interest or get herself in the news. Too bad too, I was hoping she could get the nomination - her getting crushed in the primaries is too soon.
I know! Can’t have the chance of a non-sexual-assaulter in the White House, eh? 
TBH it seems like a dumb idea, if you want to solve problems like this, not to mention get other related ones like racial pay issues in the same net, it’d be a far more prudent move to strengthen organized labor and collective bargaining than try and do some roundabout pay data analysis. Not to mention the gig economy is effectively immune to this and is a much bigger issue for people (even women) in poverty.
Why would that matter if you were doing the same job? Your pay should be based upon the job requirements, not the employee’s credentials or tenure.
Do you think an employee who has been ten years on the job should be paid the same as the hire from three months ago?
If so, and Ms. Harris agrees, that’s another reason I hope her plan isn’t implemented. Because I can’t take the chance of hiring a woman at a starting salary - I will be accused of discrimination, and seniority won’t be a good enough reason.
Regards,
Shodan
Because if you have more time in the job, you have seniority and thus more experience. You are harder to replace, and thus more valuable.
In theory, if you have a higher education you are also more valuable.
If you have seniority, do you have more responsibilities than the person making less than you?
If you don’t and have the exact same responsibilities as the person with less pay, what sort of value are you actually bringing?
If the person with less degrees and less experience can do the same job as you, I fail to see the value that you are bringing.
You do the job better, faster, with more accuracy. The new person has to spend time learning, usually from the person with seniority.
Then why aren’t you being promoted to supervisor, if you are the teacher of the less experienced?
But what you are describing is higher performance, which should get you a bit more on the payband. Not because your years of experience or degrees.
Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but given that the Republicans have spent the last thirty-plus years cutting the legs out from under organized labor and making “collective bargaining” almost as dirty a word as “liberal,” I don’t see the appeal in trying to push a boulder up that hill. It’s going to take more than one presidential administration to undo that damage.
You can also justify paying more for long tenure because it costs money to replace employees. If one company is hiring a new Widget Agent every year, and another company is keeping the same Widget Agent for 45 years before he retires, and they’re both paying their Widget Agent the same salary, then the second company will have higher profits even if the brand-new employees do just as good a job, because they don’t have to pay for job-posting ads, and spend time going through resumes and interviewing candidates and so on.
Not sure what I think yet.