President Obama signs equal pay law

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by Thetagirl218

Does the law officaly outlaw unfair pay....If so how does someone find this out legally? I heard once that if you ask, talk to, or find out another employee's pay that it is illegal and you can be fired...

It may be against a corporate policy, but it is NOT illegal. Government paid positions have to be publicly available. There is a state of Michigan web site where you can look up any employee's salary by their name. This includes universities, university hospitals, etc. Personally, I think when corporations take great measures and use threats to keep people from sharing salary information, they are usually trying to hide these kinds of unfair practices.

Originally Posted by PhiGam

A company is going to pay somebody the lowest amount that they can. If women accept less money than men for the same job then so be it.

If women are always offered less money everywhere, then they don't really have this option, do they? Obviously places that offer women a lower starting salary are discriminatory and would rather hire the man for the higher salary if they are going to have to pay that much. Additionally, it doesn't always happen at the time of the offer. It can happen with lower annual raises. Two people could start out the same but over time, if the woman only gets a 2% raise and the man gets 5%, things get out of whack very quickly. Then corporations institute policies like Thetagirl outlined, where they threaten to fire people who share salary info and the woman doesn't really know that she's being paid much less.

[Coramoor]

Originally Posted by AGDee

If women are always offered less money everywhere, then they don't really have this option, do they? Obviously places that offer women a lower starting salary are discriminatory and would rather hire the man for the higher salary if they are going to have to pay that much. Additionally, it doesn't always happen at the time of the offer. It can happen with lower annual raises. Two people could start out the same but over time, if the woman only gets a 2% raise and the man gets 5%, things get out of whack very quickly. Then corporations institute policies like Thetagirl outlined, where they threaten to fire people who share salary info and the woman doesn't really know that she's being paid much less.

So the gov't has to mandate how much one's raise will be each year?

If a woman only asks or accepts a 2% raise and a man asks for and won't accept anything less than 5%...how is that discrimination?

Also, how does this equal pay law take into account when a woman takes a leave of absence for a pregnancy? She just took of 6mo or a year from work, from gaining experience, from actually making her company money. It is only right that when she comes back she is not making as much as a man of equal talent that did not take that time off.

Hell, the list can go on and on why this is not so much an equal wage law, but an unequal wage law in favor of women.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by Coramoor

So the gov't has to mandate how much one's raise will be each year?

If a woman only asks or accepts a 2% raise and a man asks for and won't accept anything less than 5%...how is that discrimination?

Also, how does this equal pay law take into account when a woman takes a leave of absence for a pregnancy? She just took of 6mo or a year from work, from gaining experience, from actually making her company money. It is only right that when she comes back she is not making as much as a man of equal talent that did not take that time off.

Hell, the list can go on and on why this is not so much an equal wage law, but an unequal wage law in favor of women.

You are making far too many assumptions. Nobody said the govt would mandate how much raises should be, only that they should be equal pay for equal work.

How does a man not accept less than a 5% raise? Quit??? And feed your family how???

Who in the world takes a 6 month or a year maternity leave???? No woman I know. We take 6 weeks, 12 at most, as allowed by FMLA. If I took more than 12 weeks, I would lose my job. Does the research show that only mother's have this significant pay difference? Matter of fact, it does NOT.

Assuming that the difference in pay is due to maternity leaves and an inability to be assertive is as chauvinistic as the men who think they can get away with paying women less money only because they are women.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by Coramoor

So the gov't has to mandate how much one's raise will be each year?

If a woman only asks or accepts a 2% raise and a man asks for and won't accept anything less than 5%...how is that discrimination?

Also, how does this equal pay law take into account when a woman takes a leave of absence for a pregnancy? She just took of 6mo or a year from work, from gaining experience, from actually making her company money. It is only right that when she comes back she is not making as much as a man of equal talent that did not take that time off.

Hell, the list can go on and on why this is not so much an equal wage law, but an unequal wage law in favor of women.

You obviously don't realize that most pregnant women have to use vacation time for their maternity leave! Just because men can procreate like rabbits without effecting their careers doesn't mean that they should discriminate against their wives who are effected!

[Coramoor]

Haha, typical. Bring up examples of why there is a difference and you get angry responses.

Where exactly does this .78 cents figure come from? How do we even know that is a valid figure. I can think of about a dozen ways that such a study could find any figure it wanted by using biased variables.

I doubt very seriously that men go into a job interview demanding to see the salaries of every employee in their desired position to make sure they are being paid fairly!

You use something called the internet. It has all sorts of cool little tools and searches that allow you to figure out exactly how much money you should expect in your particular area.

Basically you are saying you go in to a job interview totally unprepared, do no homework on the company or how much they pay, and then say that you should get the same raise as someone else even if you don't ask for it. Oh and the gov't should mandate how much everyone is paid and how much their annual raises are.

Well maybe BO will come through for you...

[DrPhil]

All the political bullcrap and debate over whether the government should mandate equal pay aside.....

Discussions of gender inequality in the workforce are very similar to discussions of racial and ethnic inequality in the workforce.

There are official and unofficial reasons for the disparities. Some seem justified to those who want them to be justified. Such as, men generally get paid more because employers want employees who need less "family time" and can potentially work more. But looking beyond the surface and beyond profit margins, it is society's gender norms that make it such that men generally have fewer family responsibilities/expectations. Therefore, men would be hired, paid, and promoted based on societal factors beyond their qualifications and job performance.

On another note, I only expect male feminists and male proponents of gender equality to see this. I don't expect the average male to see this and especially not the average white man. Moreso than other males, white males have a history of being the primary breadwinner and being paid more than other gender and race categories (and feeling as though this disparity is justified for a number of reasons).

[UGAalum94]

Anyone have links to studies that show what was controlled for to come up with the 78 cents figure?

I think sex discrimination does happen, but I also see a lot of women with children who elect to seek one career path versus another because they want time with their children. I think it's much more rare for guys to do this. On average, I suspect that decisions that women make contributes to the disparity.

I can think of several people who went the PA route rather than the MD route for example.

Unlike AGDee, I also know women who elected to be stay at home mom for until their kids started school and effectively put themselves six years behind anyone who said in the workforce. I see few men who elect to do this.

I do think it's rare these days for companies to deliberately discriminate based on sex, but I also think that the standards men and women are held to on the job can be quite different and I think it can be much harder for women to get promoted beyond a certain point. My guess though it that 15 of the missing 22 cents that women don't earn comes from decisions that the women make.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

All the political bullcrap and debate over whether the government should mandate equal pay aside.....

Discussions of gender inequality in the workforce are very similar to discussions of racial and ethnic inequality in the workforce.

There are official and unofficial reasons for the disparities. Some seem justified to those who want them to be justified. Such as, men generally get paid more because employers want employees who need less "family time" and can potentially work more. But looking beyond the surface and beyond profit margins, it is society's gender norms that make it such that men generally have fewer family responsibilities/expectations. Therefore, men would be hired, paid, and promoted based on societal factors beyond their qualifications and job performance.

On another note, I only expect male feminists and male proponents of gender equality to see this. I don't expect the average male to see this and especially not the average white man. Moreso than other males, white males have a history of being the primary breadwinner and being paid more than other gender and race categories (and feeling as though this disparity is justified for a number of reasons).

It's not society's gender norms that gave women breasts. In an era where breast feeding is encouraged, there are biological reasons when childcare by women makes more sense. If you're talking about a two parent family, that makes someone else the primary breadwinner if breasty needs to be with the kids.

Sure, we can think of ways to overcome biological limitations, but it's not some arbitrary social construct.

[AGDee]

It has always been my understanding that these comparisons are based on equal titles and years of experience. Whether you took off 6 years to be a mom and then got 10 years experience, you still have 10 years of experience, just like the man who didn't take those 10 years off. I do know SAHMs and clearly, they aren't counted in this because they have no salary and no title. But, I don't know of any job that lets someone take 6 months to a year leave of absence and get that same job back, which is what Coramoor implied happens regularly. Of course I would not expect someone with less experience to make as much as someone with more experience. Nor would I expect a PA to be compared to an MD. But a CPA to a CPA, both with 15 years experience and similar marks on performance reviews? You bet they should be paid similarly.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

It's not society's gender norms that gave women breasts. In an era where breast feeding is encouraged, there are biological reasons when childcare by women makes more sense. If you're talking about a two parent family, that makes someone else the primary breadwinner if breasty needs to be with the kids.

Sure, we can think of ways to overcome biological limitations, but it's not some arbitrary social construct.

The point <-------------------------------------------------> you