The gender gap

[JimC]

Nor does '3.' acknowledge that there are structural and social/political/gender issues around why women occupy some roles and men others.

There are certainly those as background factors, along with historical legacies to do with girl's education. There have been some changes, at least in Oz. A definite increase of women doing engineering, driving trucks and being car mechanics, for example...

[rainbow]

Nor does '3.' acknowledge that there are structural and social/political/gender issues around why women occupy some roles and men others.

There are certainly those as background factors, along with historical legacies to do with girl's education. There have been some changes, at least in Oz. A definite increase of women doing engineering, driving trucks and being car mechanics, for example...

There are very few jobs that women can't do better than men, and they don't spend their days in the bog wanking.

[Brian Peacock]

[Scot Dutchy]

Here anyone here doing the same job is paid the same salary and anyone can do any job so long you have the right qualifications. Salaries are agreed upon for almost all by sector "CAO" (Central Labour Agreements). So there is no bias. Inequality occurs more in the top than the bottom and usually where salaries are negotiated on a personal level and glass ceilings do exist still.

[Forty Two]

Nor does '3.' acknowledge that there are structural and social/political/gender issues around why women occupy some roles and men others.

There are certainly those as background factors, along with historical legacies to do with girl's education. There have been some changes, at least in Oz. A definite increase of women doing engineering, driving trucks and being car mechanics, for example...

There are very few jobs that women can't do better than men, and they don't spend their days in the bog wanking.

[Forty Two]

In professional jobs like teaching and health, a given position is paid the same for women and men, as of course it should. The statistical differential, even in professions like this, seems (from what I've read) to be down to 2 main factors (with others possible, of course)

1. The whole time off for being a mum thing

2. A tendency for women (not all, just statistically) to not push as hard as men in the career enhancement stakes

I have no idea how this could be addressed...

3. women have a tendency to choose different careers/jobs than men - which is why you'll still see the secretaries at various offices being mostly women, school teachers are mostly women, etc., and engineers, coal miners, construction workers, etc. are mostly men.

Your "3" might be true, but it's irrelevant to my points, which were purely about comparing gender differences in pay (especially over a lifetime) within the same profession. One consequence often overlooked is in superannuation (you may not have the same system in the US) Women frequently take of several years of their working life as maternity leave, only part of it paid, so at the end of their employment, their superannuation fund can have a lot less money than a male, even given identical salaries. This particularly hits separated women when they retire...

I get that, but the gender wage gap of 77 cents or 80 cents on the dollar that folks like to trot out is not comparing jobs "within the same profession." It's comparing overall earnings. The bulk of that gender wage gap is because women tend to do things like teaching and secretarial more than men, and men gravitate toward engineering, law, accounting, mining, construction, and the like.

I agree that taking time off work, for whatever reason, means you'll earn less money. An employer doesn't really hire employees to have babies or to pay them not to work. So, there may be an issue for any stay-at-home parent, of either sex, in that they opt to stay home with their kids and save on daycare and other expenses that would be required if they continued working. However, this is within the bailiwick of individual families.

By way of example, my wife wanted to quit work after having our first. Being the patriarchal oppressor that I am, I told her, it's up to you, if you want to quit and stay home, I will support the family alone, if you wish to work and continue your career we will work that out too. She opted for the former. That wasn't her employer's decision. Sure, she'll end up earning less if she never goes back to work, or even if she does, but there are not just downsides to staying home with kids. Better care for the kids. Closer relationship, not putting them in third party custody most of the day. Savings on expenses related to transportation and daycare, and extra health expenses because day care kids get sick more than ones that stay home. When I did the math, our family situation would be about the same whether she worked or did not work, because so much of her earnings would go toward getting her to and from work and care for the child.

Now there may be something to be addressed there. But, I've never been in favor of saddling employers with the responsibility. If some sort of payment should be made, then have the government pay people equally.

The idea of paid employer leave is a windfall for high income earners, by the way, because employees only get the pay they earn on the job. So a minimum wage woman will only get minimum wage paid leave, and $150,000 a year lawyer will get a pro rata portion of that for her time off. That means that the minimum wage worker is less able to "choose" not to work and go on leave. A high income earner can sit pretty.

A great boost to American business would be to eliminate any requirement for paid leave, and allow leave to be taken at a government prescribed rate of earnings. So the fat cat lawyer will not earn full pay for time off, and that cost is off the employers' backs.

[Scot Dutchy]

What messed up countries you live in.

[Cunt]

Nor does '3.' acknowledge that there are structural and social/political/gender issues around why women occupy some roles and men others.

There are certainly those as background factors, along with historical legacies to do with girl's education. There have been some changes, at least in Oz. A definite increase of women doing engineering, driving trucks and being car mechanics, for example...

There are very few jobs that women can't do better than men, and they don't spend their days in the bog wanking.

There are loads of jobs men can do better than women. Look at bush pilots. They have to (among other duties) move fuel drums around, often on tundra or gravel. It is very heavy work, which means only the strongest pilots (meaning male) get sent on those jobs. More hours = greater job prospects in the pilot world, by the way.

I do think there is a huge difference, and don't like this one runner, Lanni Marchant, but I do like how she explained why we SHOULD be lowering the bar for female distance runners in Canadian athletics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOLHk3GDQIM

[mistermack]

Well I've tried to get to the bottom of it reading around the topic. It isn't easy as it happens. But basically it seems that the council were awarding compensation on an ad hoc basis to female workers who claimed they had lost out because of lack of equal pay, They were required by the rules to claim within six months of leaving their jobs with Brum council. The actual law suit concerned extending the period allowed for claiming from 6 months to several years. Once that was settled it opened up the gates for other women to claim.

So the council had already accepted the principle that this group of women had effectively been underpaid compared to their male counterparts. The timing of the appeals was the key issue.

The 'grading' issue is part of the mix. All councils were required to go through that process around 2007/8 (roughly as I recall) - I had to.

The basic issue of the women having been paid less than men and that this was 'unfair' was not questioned it seems. Nor should it have been.

Basically, it's a Labour council, spending money that isn't theirs. What's fair and not fair therefore becomes political, rather than factual. If it was their own money they were spending, they wouldn't have been so free with it.

Dinner ladies are not bin men. Why the fuck should a job be graded? Like I said, jobs are in a market. If you want to attract staff, you have to pay a wage that will attract them. Equally, people can't demand a wage that they think they deserve. You offer your services, if the job and wages suits you. If you get chosen, that's the deal. When two parties agree to a deal, that should be that.

[Brian Peacock]

School "dinner ladies are not bin men". Of course. One lot is just women doing women's work, and the others are men doing a man's work - and women's work is just less important and less arduous, less challenging, less skilled, and less responsible than men's, eh?

[Cunt]

School "dinner ladies are not bin men". Of course. One lot is just women doing women's work, and the others are men doing a man's work - and women's work is just less important and less arduous, less challenging, less skilled, and less responsible than men's, eh?

Try it.

I've done both. They are very different.

[laklak]

I warned everyone not to let them vote.

[Cunt]

I warned everyone not to let them vote.

I once read that the best way to lie was to tell the truth, and tell all of it, but tell it in a way which could never be believed.

[JimC]

School "dinner ladies are not bin men". Of course. One lot is just women doing women's work, and the others are men doing a man's work - and women's work is just less important and less arduous, less challenging, less skilled, and less responsible than men's, eh?

Try it.

I've done both. They are very different.

So, did being a dinner lady require an op, or just some judicious padding and a wig?

[Cunt]

Casual dress. Though the kids did love the many-patched jeans I often wore. They were a bit clownish. (the pants, not the kids)