Equal Pay Day: When, where and why women earn less than men

The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?


And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

a reply to: reldra


I didn't say it was right, I said how it is.

When a company needs someone to do a job, the most reliable people are chosen.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

Women should get better maternity compensation, like that of European countries.

Blame the government.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that? It is a yes or no answer.

I'm at work now so I can't look up the thread that dug into the stats and how they were gathered, but yes they calculated the 79 cents thing very skewed. I won't say they cherry picked data but rather dismissed many factors that contributed to their end number. Basically the 79 cents thing is BS. I also bet you didn't look into what stats were used and how they were applied either did you? You just read something someone else said then came here and started up with the "no fair" thread. I can tell you that your argument has been debunked here and it won't fly far no matter how many times someone makes a thread on it.

originally posted by: RickyD
I'm at work now so I can't look up the thread that dug into the stats and how they were gathered, but yes they calculated the 79 cents thing very skewed. I won't say they cherry picked data but rather dismissed many factors that contributed to their end number. Basically the 79 cents thing is BS. I also bet you didn't look into what stats were used and how they were applied either did you? You just read something someone else said then came here and started up with the "no fair" thread. I can tell you that your argument has been debunked here and it won't fly far no matter how many times someone makes a thread on it.

Your recollections while at work do not count.

source

wikipedia

with graph from the Census bureau

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that?

It has been debunked. Basic statistics.

If you look at all the women who work and add up their salaries they will make less than all the men. However, this does not take into consideration:

1) Women take more time off work
2) Women go into lower paying fields than men. For example, women are more likely to go into say teaching while men are more likely to be in higher paid STEM professions.

When you control the variables so that it is apples to apples, THERE IS NOT GOD DAMN WAGE GAP. Good grief. When you control for education, profession, etc the wage gap is practically non-existent.

For example, if you take women MBAs from Harvard who work in Investment Banking and who are say 35 years old, there is no wage gap.

You take women engineers with master degrees who work at IT companies, there is no wage gap.

You cannot take aggregate numbers and draw any kind of conclusion that women are paid less for the same job. It is bad math to do so...

a reply to: Lysergic

originally posted by: reldra

It has NOT been debunked.

Sorry, it's just easier to post these than going back and forth. I think the myth is pretty handy defeated in all 3.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that?

It has been debunked. Basic statistics.

If you look at all the women who work and add up their salaries they will make less than all the men. However, this does not take into consideration:

1) Women take more time off work
2) Women go into lower paying fields than men. For example, women are more likely to go into say teaching while men are more likely to be in higher paid STEM professions.

When you control the variables so that it is apples to apples, THERE IS NOT GOD DAMN WAGE GAP. Good grief. When you control for education, profession, etc the wage gap is practically non-existent.

For example, if you take women MBAs from Harvard who work in Investment Banking and who are say 35 years old, there is no wage gap.

You take women engineers with master degrees who work at IT companies, there is no wage gap.

You cannot take aggregate numbers and draw any kind of conclusion that women are paid less for the same job. It is bad math to do so...

Just look above for sources. Your personal lists are not sources.

a reply to: TheBulk

No, they aren't.
I gave 3 sources and here is 4 politifact



Bureau of Labor and Statistics

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that?

It has been debunked. Basic statistics.

If you look at all the women who work and add up their salaries they will make less than all the men. However, this does not take into consideration:

1) Women take more time off work
2) Women go into lower paying fields than men. For example, women are more likely to go into say teaching while men are more likely to be in higher paid STEM professions.

When you control the variables so that it is apples to apples, THERE IS NOT GOD DAMN WAGE GAP. Good grief. When you control for education, profession, etc the wage gap is practically non-existent.

For example, if you take women MBAs from Harvard who work in Investment Banking and who are say 35 years old, there is no wage gap.

You take women engineers with master degrees who work at IT companies, there is no wage gap.

You cannot take aggregate numbers and draw any kind of conclusion that women are paid less for the same job. It is bad math to do so...

Just look above for sources. Your personal lists are not sources.

It has nothing to do with sources. Its is basic statistics 101. You apparently didn't take an intro stat class or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that?

It has been debunked. Basic statistics.

If you look at all the women who work and add up their salaries they will make less than all the men. However, this does not take into consideration:

1) Women take more time off work
2) Women go into lower paying fields than men. For example, women are more likely to go into say teaching while men are more likely to be in higher paid STEM professions.

When you control the variables so that it is apples to apples, THERE IS NOT GOD DAMN WAGE GAP. Good grief. When you control for education, profession, etc the wage gap is practically non-existent.

For example, if you take women MBAs from Harvard who work in Investment Banking and who are say 35 years old, there is no wage gap.

You take women engineers with master degrees who work at IT companies, there is no wage gap.

You cannot take aggregate numbers and draw any kind of conclusion that women are paid less for the same job. It is bad math to do so...

Just look above for sources. Your personal lists are not sources.

It has nothing to do with sources. Its is basic statistics 101. You apparently didn't take an intro stat class or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

therefore I added bureau of Labor and Statistics

Of course I took that class. Did you?

well here is one thread...a few others came up. i dont expect this to matter to you as you dont seem ready to look at any other possibility other than youre right and boohoo women and such.

a reply to: RickyD
I have read it. It changes very little here. The last source I gave is extremely accurate.

'Boohoo women and such' is really very offensive. Do you have some sort of complex?

originally posted by: RickyD
well here is one thread...a few others came up. i dont expect this to matter to you as you dont seem ready to look at any other possibility other than youre right and boohoo women and such.

I wanted to make sure that was quoted. It is really very misogynistic.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that?

It has been debunked. Basic statistics.

If you look at all the women who work and add up their salaries they will make less than all the men. However, this does not take into consideration:

1) Women take more time off work
2) Women go into lower paying fields than men. For example, women are more likely to go into say teaching while men are more likely to be in higher paid STEM professions.

When you control the variables so that it is apples to apples, THERE IS NOT GOD DAMN WAGE GAP. Good grief. When you control for education, profession, etc the wage gap is practically non-existent.

For example, if you take women MBAs from Harvard who work in Investment Banking and who are say 35 years old, there is no wage gap.

You take women engineers with master degrees who work at IT companies, there is no wage gap.

You cannot take aggregate numbers and draw any kind of conclusion that women are paid less for the same job. It is bad math to do so...

Just look above for sources. Your personal lists are not sources.

It has nothing to do with sources. Its is basic statistics 101. You apparently didn't take an intro stat class or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

therefore I added bureau of Labor and Statistics

Of course I took that class. Did you?

Apparently you were sleep in class if you can't seem to grasp that you cannot simply look at aggregate numbers to draw a conclusion on average salaries to claim a wage gap. Even in your BLS link, anyone with basic understanding can see flaws in the numbers. The BLS doesn't tell you WHY, just that there is a difference.

When you understand WHY, you understand the gap is just a reflection of the mix of workers and other variables not that there is intentional discrimination.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: frostie

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The unfortunate truth is that women have babies and when kids get sick they are going to take time off. When that happens men get promoted and they don't. Men also get jobs that women don't when an employer is fearful of maternity leave. Women over 40 are not as effected by this sort of thing as much.
I have seen this first hand in my own job.

It is unfortunate and it must change. Men contributed 50% to the baby, why is it that women must take the fall? By your logic.

Women must have the baby, care for the baby and then not get promotions?

And then get paid 79 cents on the dollar?

Biology.

And stop with the whole 79 cents thing. It has been debunked.

It has NOT been debunked. And the number is lower for Latino and Black women. So, I will not stop with it.

Biology? That is your answer? Biology teaches that it takes 2. If employers are doing this it is discrimination and it MJST be stopped. Unless you would like this:

An employer asks if you have fathered a child. You say yes. You then get a lower chance of being promoted and make 21 cents less an hour than your male counterparts who have not. Even less an hour if you are Latino or Black.

Are you comfortable with that?

It has been debunked. Basic statistics.

If you look at all the women who work and add up their salaries they will make less than all the men. However, this does not take into consideration:

1) Women take more time off work
2) Women go into lower paying fields than men. For example, women are more likely to go into say teaching while men are more likely to be in higher paid STEM professions.

When you control the variables so that it is apples to apples, THERE IS NOT GOD DAMN WAGE GAP. Good grief. When you control for education, profession, etc the wage gap is practically non-existent.

For example, if you take women MBAs from Harvard who work in Investment Banking and who are say 35 years old, there is no wage gap.

You take women engineers with master degrees who work at IT companies, there is no wage gap.

You cannot take aggregate numbers and draw any kind of conclusion that women are paid less for the same job. It is bad math to do so...

Just look above for sources. Your personal lists are not sources.

It has nothing to do with sources. Its is basic statistics 101. You apparently didn't take an intro stat class or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

therefore I added bureau of Labor and Statistics

Of course I took that class. Did you?

Apparently you were sleep in class if you can't seem to grasp that you cannot simply look at aggregate numbers to draw a conclusion on average salaries to claim a wage gap. Even in your BLS link, anyone with basic understanding can see flaws in the numbers. The BLS doesn't tell you WHY, just that there is a difference.

When you understand WHY, you understand the gap is just a reflection of the mix of workers and other variables not that there is intentional discrimination.

In many cases, it is intentional. It always has been. You seem to have skipped some history classes.

a reply to: Edumakated

Perhaps you would like to revisit if women should own property or vote? Men seemed to like to argue about that. I am off to dinner.

a reply to: reldra

Very offensive? Really now? Do YOU have a complex?