Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And the problem is that companies make the presumption that a woman is not the breadwinner, and will have higher absenteeism, and pay accordingly, whether it's true or NOT for the woman they've hired.
No, not at all. This girl is paid about 50 cents less per hour only b/c she is not as experienced as the rest of us and has not proven herself to be reliable. I really do not think companies preemptively pay anyone less, it is based on their actual actions. I do not have a crystal ball, she has done this to herself. NOT b/c she is a woman. She is the breadwinner in the situation actually, sadly, the baby daddy stays home and does NOTHING. Note that the first raise we gave was to a FEMALE. That is not counting the raise I got when I completed my manager's training.
Quote:
There are women out there who don't have children, and who are the breadwinner in their households, but who get penalized by the gap in gender pay regardless of their education, skill set, experience, or work ethic. And we know that this is true because even when you break it down by industry, by job, women are consistently paid less across the board.
I really just do not believe this to be true. There are reasons for things. For example, when we lived in Florida, my husband was the GM of one store, the other two stores were run by women. They did NOT have the same sales volume as DH did. Their pay was less b/c they had less on their plates to deal with, their track record was not proven and they also got lower bonuses since that was based on profit. When I worked in retail, I have had PLENTY of female managers. When I worked at a credit union, a grocery store, call centers, the vast majority of my writing editors were women, every restaurant I've worked in has always had tons of women in management.... There are reasons to pay one person less than another and gender is just not one of them. It is also impossible to say one person's skill set or experience is the same as another's. One person may have a better work ethic also. Say employee A slacks off and always leaves at 5, but employee B is a hard worker and if there is still work to do, stays until it's done which may be afte 5. Who do you think deserves more pay?
Quote:
Years ago, I even had a hiring manager tell me that he paid men more because men were the primary breadwinners. He paid men more, regardless of their work responsibilities, and he put men on promotional tracks that he didn't put women on, because he perceived that women would have to take more time off than men in order to care for their children. And he did this whether the woman was a mother or NOT. He didn't evaluate employees with the same measures, regardless of their gender. He evaluated them differently because of their gender. And when that became against the law, he simply used other excuses to justify his discriminatory behavior, like the popular excuse of today, that women don't negotiate as well as men. Which ignores the fact that negotiation is in part based on information. And women are given different information about the pay scale going in than men are.
What he did was wrong, but how many years ago was this? Times do change and women are becoming more respected in the workplace.
Women earn less because they work less and take more time off to tend to family "issues". Men are deemed more RELIABLE and thus are valued more.
Whoa, Nellie (or should I say, "Buster"?) !!
Katiana"Women are not out having kids for the entirety of their careers. Really career-oriented women have a baby, take a maternity leave; a couple years later have another baby, take another mat. leave, and are then in the work force for the next 30-35 years."
That is a major corporate disruption. If she spends say 5 years working of 7 total at each job, being out 2 years with a kid , means 28.6^ missed. Add in doctor visits after, pre-school closing early for weather, etc, and she ends up out 1/3 of her career at the corp, and than she whines "I make less than X", of either gender, who was there the entire 7 years.
I think the biggest reason is women tend to be non confrontational, and do not negotiate when it comes to pay raises. Though taking off more time, and utilizing benefits might add to it, i feel that is the largest reason.
Women earn less because they work less and take more time off to tend to family "issues". Men are deemed more RELIABLE and thus are valued more.
Whoa, Nellie (or should I say, "Buster"?) !!
Katiana"Women are not out having kids for the entirety of their careers. Really career-oriented women have a baby, take a maternity leave; a couple years later have another baby, take another mat. leave, and are then in the work force for the next 30-35 years."
That is a major corporate disruption. If she spends say 5 years working of 7 total at each job, being out 2 years with a kid , means 28.6^ missed. Add in doctor visits after, pre-school closing early for weather, etc, and she ends up out 1/3 of her career at the corp, and than she whines "I make less than X", of either gender, who was there the entire 7 years.
If one missed 33% of a test, they get a "D".
It's hard to read your post b/c of the formatting, and your "vodoo math" is a little difficult to understand, but you apparently missed my post where I said that most companies give out 6wks-3mo (12 wks) maternity leave AT MOST! Some only give a couple weeks. Where do you get this idea about taking two years off per kid? Six weeks is about standard for major surgery, which ANY MAN can experience as well.
I read an article that said that women are MORE likely to use vacation time and the like (PTO) when taking off time for kids' activities; men are more likely to just leave the office and feel like they deserve it. I wish I could find it again; I believe it was in "Working Mother".
In another thread about younger vs older workers I posted a link about "family-oriented" workers vs "job-oriented" workers; it seems that as people get older, more of both sexes become more family oriented, and are more likely to turn down overtime. You may do a search of my posts to find that.
Actually, Katiana many states mandate more than 12 weeks, which is just the Fed standard. And in practice, I've seen women stay home several years per kid. Others go p/t remotely for the same length after FMLA and state periods, plus accrued vacation run out.
The fact remains this is a major strain on corps, and as such, those who take extended periods off like this, and when one has multiple kids, its multiple times, are simply not as valuable an employee, as one there all the time.
Actually, Katiana many states mandate more than 12 weeks, which is just the Fed standard. And in practice, I've seen women stay home several years per kid. Others go p/t remotely for the same length after FMLA and state periods, plus accrued vacation run out.
The fact remains this is a major strain on corps, and as such, those who take extended periods off like this, and when one has multiple kids, its multiple times, are simply not as valuable an employee, as one there all the time.
The fact remains that whether some employees take off time or not, that not all women do, but that study, after study, after study, shows that when you compare apples to apples, or Ms Employee to Mr Employee, that Mr Employee enters the workforce earning more than Ms Employee, regardless of qualifications, and that if they continue on the identical work track, neither taking time off for personal reasons, both performing well, that the disparity in pay between the two will simply have continued to grow over time. While certain professions are statistical anomalies, the fact remains that in the workforce women are consistently paid LESS than men. And that that is true even when family considerations are not in play.
Actually, Katiana many states mandate more than 12 weeks, which is just the Fed standard. And in practice, I've seen women stay home several years per kid. Others go p/t remotely for the same length after FMLA and state periods, plus accrued vacation run out.
The fact remains this is a major strain on corps, and as such, those who take extended periods off like this, and when one has multiple kids, its multiple times, are simply not as valuable an employee, as one there all the time.
Show me some links about states mandating maternity leave and for how long.
I sure would like to see you "motivated" to have a career, family, home, kids activities, ad nauseum as most women in the workplace do.
What a load of malarkey.
interesting. so you agree: women are less motivated to earn money, because they are more motivated by other, non-wage-earning activities like "family, home, kids activities, ad nauseum as most women in the workplace do."
seems to me you've answered your own question; case closed!
interesting. so you agree: women are less motivated to earn money, because they are more motivated by other, non-wage-earning activities like "family, home, kids activities, ad nauseum as most women in the workplace do."
seems to me you've answered your own question; case closed!
I really think this is the issue and I think it's based on sexism actually.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
