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.
Should a married man get paid more because he has a wife and kids to support?
let's say, same job, same skills etc.....
I think there are only two considerations:
1.) What is the salary range that a particular job merits.
2.) Where on that scale do the experience and skills of a successful candidate place him.
No other considerations.
For quite a few years I was part of the hiring process at a very large institution, there were never any other factors that were considered. And I feel that this is the way it should be.
Your ancestry is limited to your parents? Hunters-gatherer tribes had the ancient ways (not always pretty and "humane") to maintain zero population growth and even then sudden environmental changes frequently overrided careful birth controls and created situations when parents could not support nutritional needs of their not so numerous kids. However, since the dawn of Agricultural age that went down the drain, people started to breed like rabbits all way into Industrial age, the strongest and the meanest survived. Actually, unconstrained breeding was (and is) a staple of the Christian doctrine for 2000 years. I'm 200% sure your (and mine) ancestors were not an exception to the general rule. Probability of that is exactly zero.
It's very ironic, we have LESS control over your lives than hunters gatherers did 50,000 years ago and yet we maintain the illusion than we are in charge. Never-mind the fact that we don't even know what we don't know what will affect our financial situation.
Well, I'm living in 2012. I'm not having any children until I feel I am financially able. A dog is expensive enough. I might not ever have children. I don't feel the need to reproduce just because society views it as being "Normal".
Parents that are already living in poverty and having children has to be the most irresponsible act I have ever seen. It's a selfish act.
No, married people should not get paid more than single people regardless of gender.
In fact, an argument could be made that people with children should be paid less than those without. People with children tend to miss more work dealing with their kids and as a result their productivity suffers and the singles and childless employees have to make up the slack.
Absolutely not! Everyone should be paid based on the quality of their work and nothing else. Having kids is a CHOICE and IMO it's a choice some people shouldn't make. If you don't have the money to raise kids w/out help, then you shouldn't have kids.
I agree they should not, however I bet alot of the people here who also say no actually themselves do get paid more. Many employers pay at least part of family health insurance premiums and an employee's sick time can be taken for sick kids in addition to themselves, therefore many with kids actually do get paid more in salary and benefits than they would if they didn't have kids. I always found that unfair.. both before and after getting married myself.
I've had to carry the load on countless occasions for those that have had " emergencies " yet because of salary I was not compensated more and the person absent was not compensated " less " due to this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sco
No, married people should not get paid more than single people regardless of gender.
In fact, an argument could be made that people with children should be paid less than those without. People with children tend to miss more work dealing with their kids and as a result their productivity suffers and the singles and childless employees have to make up the slack.
Should a married man get paid more because he has a wife and kids to support?
let's say, same job, same skills etc..
this is what happened in the past and still does in some countries, hardly equitable but does it have any validity today?
No. First, you are assuming the married man has kids. He might not.
Second, you are assuming that the married father's contribution is more valuable than the unmarried non-father's. Wrong.
Third, would you equally support single women making more than married women because we lack a big strong man to bring in the extra bacon? Didn't think so.
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.
