what they want is for a newly minted college grad girl to walk in and get the same pay as somebody that's been there for twenty YEARS!!!
Posted on 05/07/2012 6:52:58 AM PDT by ReleaseTheHounds
Team Obama calculates that its road to victory is paved with the votes of women, so the American people are now subject to a coordinated effort to cast GOP opposition to expanding government power as an assault on the weaker sex. But few women view public policy as a battle between the sexes. Women whose husbands, brothers and sons are struggling to find jobs find no comfort in women's comparatively low unemployment rate.
Next up in the Democratic campaign is the Paycheck Fairness Act, supposedly necessary to achieve "equal pay" for women. Never mind that it's already illegal to pay women less than men for the same work. Democrats say that failure to support this bill is akin to greenlighting workplace discrimination. In reality, women aren't the primary beneficiaries of the Paycheck Fairness Act. Lawyers are, since it encourages more litigation, increases potential lawsuit payouts, and makes it more difficult for companies to defend themselves.
Under the act, the government would also collect more information about compensation practices and establish a national award for employers deemed best in advancing "pay equity." These are distractions companies don't need.
Feminists have long wanted enlightened government officials, rather than the indifferent market, to determine salaries. Information collection and government-compensation guidelines today could easily become regulations and mandates tomorrow.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
what they want is for a newly minted college grad girl to walk in and get the same pay as somebody that's been there for twenty YEARS!!!
Do you realize how marxist this is? Marx held that free markets devalued human worth by making labor simply another commodity to be bought and sold. Government should step in and “level” the labor trade by paying each individual the same. The ultimate goal is to simply collectivize all a society’s wealth and use it to supply the needs of the citizenry, thereby eliminating the need for compensation at all.
This is clearly a step in that direction, driven by a false dialectic that asserts women are paid less than men.
One faces certain death in an accident and the other might get a paper-cut. So both have dangerous jobs and deserve equal pay.
In the free market, when all choice factors are included, women make about 5% less than men. In general, with wide deviation at the individual level, women's brains are about 10% smaller than men. They're aren't 10% dumber but definitely the brain cell count and processing power is less. If you look at MCAT scores to get into medical school, women consistently score about 5% less than men. There you go, women in general make 5% less than men because on average they have 5% less mental firepower. Outside of government jobs, employees aren't paid for breathing, but for thinking.
Isn’t it always the way with liberalism, that instead of lifting people up, it forcefully pulls others down in a vain attempt to achieve some mythical equality?
There are a myriad of reasons why women earn less than men, but that is hard facts that liberals dismiss. It is all about appearance to them.
Where I work, I earn somewhat more than some of the males who do the same job, should my pay be cut so that we all make the same?
Idiots being idiotic again.
If the concept gets forced to the point of screwing with your paycheck to put on the appearance of fairness, then put the screws to the employer. Let them fail. I was in a position to turn the failure into a success and reap a reward in the form of a promotion. When the employer doesn't have the option, there will be no value in coming to their rescue.
“...because women still are the ones who really care about the family.”
Not true. Try taking your head out of your @$$ before making generalizations like this.
Holy crap, I wish you had directed that post to someone else.
look bud, think what you want. But all this is factually and statistically correct. There are individual exceptions.
Hey, great business model idea folks! I'll start a business, and all my employees will be minority females, who work at the same work output as their white male counterparts, and I'll have a 5% competitive advantage on every other business out there!
I wonder why no one has thought of this? Perhaps because
IT ISN'T TRUE.
Let’s look at the larger picture:
Women have demanded & gotten time off to have their children.....now they are wanting such time off to be PAID by the employer. Not fair, I say.
Are the Feds going to look at a year’s W-2 or look at hourly pay? If a woman is gone 6 weeks for her ‘new born’—that can affect a W-2.
Men tend to get more education than women—therefore, such extra education should draw more hourly pay. Women get married- get pregnant- and then start whining about getting special benefits the men never can get because of sheer biology.
Men can do a larger range of jobs- lift more- are more willing to do dirty jobs like oil fields, etc.
Women want the ‘clean jobs’—they want exact hours, and most are not willing to work overtime to get something done or to get a repaired part out the door. Men will be more likely to do that.
Even women who have no kids or are single want to watch the time clock. They don’t look at a job or skill as a career—it is just a job & a paycheck. They can call it a career all they want—but then they cannot have multiple interruptions in continuous service to have their ‘family’. This has always stuck in my craw.
Women have created a hostile environment in the business place for all men. Even the slightest lift of an eyebrow by a man can draw a sexual harassment suit. I know a large number of men who used to be friendly in their work environment. Now, they only speak to a female when required to do so. They no longer EVER go to lunch with a female co-worked in the group. Some even refuse to car pool with female co-workers. Too much risk. On top of that, men who own businesses are now carrying extra insurance premiums because of potential accusations of sexual misconduct. I am talking about men who have never intentially said or done anything toward a female employee that could have construed as sexual harassment or misconduct before the 70’s. Women have handcuffed their own opportunities, IMO.
The vagueness of the wording of sexual harassment laws have men on edge and women on the prowl, IMO.
I remember the old argement: “Why should a SINGLE brain surgeon get more pay than a MARRIED janitor with 9 kids? The guy with 9 kids needed to support them in the manner they wished to be supported!!””
The non-match of the skills involved wasn’t allowed to be discussed—only the number of children!!
In the 70’s or 80’s in Angeles, there was a stupid push over the price of cleaning/laundry fees about the difference of the cost of a man’s shirt and a woman’s blouse. The women were complaining that they were being ‘overcharged’.
No matter that the honest, hard working people of the cleaning industry showed over and over again that all the design differences, buttons, etc. of a woman’s blouse required more time to press, etc., versus the sameness and flatness of a man’s shirt——the Los Angeles City Council demanded that the price be the same...
Sooooo—the cost of a man’s shirt went to over $1.50 or more to match the price of a woman’s blouse!!!!! Some of those increases were over double!
The hue and cry was wonderful!!!
Then they started to debate the same subject regarding HAIRCUTS!!! Again- the women thought they were being overcharged!
After their abject failure on the cleaning fight, the haircut fight never got off the ground!!
We are not oreo cookies—one of the reasons I quit working in union jobs. The worst employee with the same required job ‘skills’ got paid the same as the best, fastest, most accurate employee for the same ‘skills’. The worst one could be a total slacker & the best one could work rings around the worst one, but work performance bonuses were never granted. I said goodbye.
One union job I left took 2 1/2 persons to replace me. I still love that fact. Some of the job duties I held were never replaced. No one could find all the info I could find. I wasn’t offering them any help, either. It is my brain & MY effort. You cannot mandate me to prop up the lazy ones. Period.
well, guess what? I agree with you. Women are wired to take care of the kids and men are the hunter/gatherers/protectors.
The 5% delta is true when all *choice* factors are included but exclude the biological factors. The delta disappears when you include the biological factors. Women score 5% less on cognitive function tests on average, such as the MCAT, which accounts for the pay difference. You can no longer use the SAT test scores to measure that because it has been politically corrected to the point it hides most of the difference. However if you look at old SAT scores you can see it there too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.