Gender Pay Gap Still Exists

[Sojourner]

[url="http://www.startribune.com/535/story/1137500.html"]Associated Press article[/url]
[quote]NEW YORK -- Women make only 80 percent of the salaries their male peers do one year after college; after 10 years in the work force, the gap between their pay widens further, according to a study released today.
The study, by the American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, found that 10 years after college, women earn only 69 percent of what men earn.

Even after controlling for hours, occupation, parenthood, and other factors known to affect earnings, the study found that one-quarter of the pay gap remains unexplained. The group said that portion of the gap is "likely due to sex discrimination.''

"Over time, the unexplained portion of the pay gap grows,'' the group said in a news release.

Catherine Hill, the organization's director of research, said: "Part of the wage difference is a result of people's choices, another part is employer's assumptions of what people's choices will be. ... Employers assume that young women are going to leave the work force when they have children, and, therefore, don't promote them.''

The organization found that women's scholastic performance was not reflected in their compensation. Women have slightly higher grade point averages than men in every major, including science and math. But women who attend highly selective colleges earn the same as men who attend minimally selective colleges, according to the study.

"The pay gap is not going to disappear just through educational achievements,'' Hill said.[/quote]

I'm curious about how we as Catholics should address this phenomenon.

Edited April 23, 2007 by Terra Firma

[Guest T-Bone]

There's a number of factors not addressed.

Here's a biggie:

Men tend to be better (more forceful) negotiators than women. This could very well lead to higher pay.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='T-Bone' post='1254283' date='Apr 23 2007, 03:05 PM']There's a number of factors not addressed.

Here's a biggie:

Men tend to be better (more forceful) negotiators than women. This could very well lead to higher pay.[/quote]
That is interesting ... I know that I've gotten a lot better on the negotiating front at this point in my career than I was to start out with.

[hoosieranna]

It's definitely a factor worth considering.

[Aloysius]

of course when speaking statistically in this fashion, your personal knack for negotiating may represent a statistical exception. I don't know, though.

I always found it very interesting how the majority of two-income families end up spending so much on commutes and daycare and workclothes et cetera that they end up making nearly the same amount as single-income families, even if there was no pay gap.

it is entirely likely that the pay decrease over time might correspond to child-bearing... just a conjecture off the top of my head. The initial pay gap may correspond either to what Reza said, or some actual attitudal and institutional sexism; but if the pay gap increases over time, it might correspond to having children somehow.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1254339' date='Apr 23 2007, 04:22 PM']of course when speaking statistically in this fashion, your personal knack for negotiating may represent a statistical exception. I don't know, though.

I always found it very interesting how the majority of two-income families end up spending so much on commutes and daycare and workclothes et cetera that they end up making nearly the same amount as single-income families, even if there was no pay gap.

it is entirely likely that the pay decrease over time might correspond to child-bearing... just a conjecture off the top of my head. The initial pay gap may correspond either to what Reza said, or some actual attitudal and institutional sexism; but if the pay gap increases over time, it might correspond to having children somehow.[/quote]
Yeah, they corrected in the statistics for things like child bearing and other factors that they know have an effect on earnings.

As far as the two-income family observation: The families I know where both parents work factor in all the things you mention and still come out ahead of having one parent stay home. My personal observations are anecdotal rather than statistical, however, so you may be right. However, I think it's important to recognize that money is often not the only consideration in having both parents work. There are other benefits that one gains from being employed that can enrich both the individual and the family.

But this thread is not about whether women should be in the workplace; rather about fair and just compensation for women who are in the workplace.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1254222' date='Apr 23 2007, 03:54 PM'][url="http://www.startribune.com/535/story/1137500.html"]Associated Press article[/url]
I'm curious about how we as Catholics should address this phenomenon.[/quote]
Well, obviously women should just stick to having children and getting themselves a man as soon as possible. not in that order. I also would advocate banning lady-shoes in the event that women start getting ideas about doing things without their husband's permission, like go outside and stuff.

But really, I don't know. I think if a woman chooses to be a wife (and hence a mother) then she should probably be less attached to a career anyway.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' post='1254400' date='Apr 23 2007, 06:12 PM']Well, obviously women should just stick to having children and getting themselves a man as soon as possible. not in that order. I also would advocate banning lady-shoes in the event that women start getting ideas about doing things without their husband's permission, like go outside and stuff.[/quote]


:

[quote name='toledo_jesus' post='1254400' date='Apr 23 2007, 06:12 PM']But really, I don't know. I think if a woman chooses to be a wife (and hence a mother) then she should probably be less attached to a career anyway. [/quote]
I know a handful of women who have been able to pull off marriage and career really well ... it is not easy. But I think the argument that a woman should not be as tied to career is not a good reason to pay her less. The worker should be paid for the value of services rendered. Paying women less says something about the value of the work we do, and about our value to society. Maybe complete parity will never be possible because of things like child care and other things mentioned in the article, but I think it could be closer to equal than women earning 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. Just a thought.

[Socrates]

As a man who makes considerably less than most women I meet (and dealing with the considerable social difficulty this creates), I personally have trouble getting worked up over this issue. (Though I realize my particular situation is an anomaly, and is really off-topic.)

I think the whole "gender-gap" issue is blown out of proportion by the media. And every account I've read indicates that the gap is closing, rather than getting worse.
I think a lot of it has to do with the fact, that as a whole, women tend to take lower-paying jobs than men. Women are less likely than men to take jobs in high-paying fields such as science/engineering, and are also less likely to be high-ranking business executives, though more and more women are rising to the top in the business world. That is probably in part, as others suggested, that women tend to be on average somewhat less aggressive, and this is a disadvantage in the cut-throat world of business.

While there may be some "institutional sexism" involved, I do not believe government should be getting involved to insure "equal" pay. That kind of government interference ultimately does more harm than good, and there are many factors which go into play when choosing how much to pay people. Women can pressure employers to pay them more (if they are doing good work, the employer may give them a raise, rather than lose a good worker), but government agencies and lawyers coming in to decide what is "fair" and "equal" pay basically amounts to socialist busybodydom, and can be very destructive and counter-productive. I am against "affirmative action" of any sort.

And (no offense to the "career women"), I am not sure that that the rising number of well-paid professional career-oriented women has entirely a positive effect on the direction of our society as a whole. From my experience, it seems that many of these female professional types become so comfortable or enwrapped in their position, that they have little interest in dating/marriage, or postpone it till late in life. And they, of course, are mostly only interested in marrying men wealthier than themselves, which narrows the field for men of lower to moderate income.

Pardon my rambling, but in short, while there may still be some genuine problems, I do not see this as some crisis demanding legal and/or government "action."

[beata_virgo_maria]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1254516' date='Apr 23 2007, 06:07 PM']I think the whole "gender-gap" issue is blown out of proportion by the media. And every account I've read indicates that the gap is closing, rather than getting worse.
I think a lot of it has to do with the fact, that as a whole, women tend to take lower-paying jobs than men. Women are less likely than men to take jobs in high-paying fields such as science/engineering, and are also less likely to be high-ranking business executives, though more and more women are rising to the top in the business world. That is probably in part, as others suggested, that women tend to be on average somewhat less aggressive, and this is a disadvantage in the cut-throat world of business.[/quote]

I've studied into some of the statistics involved in this and women make less than men (only 80% of what men make) in the same career fields with the same educational backgrounds as men. Also I would say that women can be very aggressive, it's just a different "type" of aggressiveness, so with men in most of the higher positions they just can't identify it as well as say another women would.

Although you are right in some senses because there have been studies that showed that women ask for pay raises less than men.

[KnightofChrist]

Well I'm surprised it hasn't been pointed out, and no matter how simple it sounds, one reason for the gap is women tend to have babies, where as men do not. Men generally work the whole of their lives from their teenage years to retirement, each time they take on a new job they typically get paid more. Women in most cases do not work from teenage years to retirement, in most cases they have kids, quit work and stay home. This is most likely one of the causes for the gap.

Generally the people who achieve/work more are paid more. Not to say women in the work force do not work harder than men and more than men, but looking at the whole picture generally that is not the case most of the time. Its like a mountain at the top is the most paid worker, men in general climb their whole life, for themselves and family (which is the reason perhaps they are more aggressive), were as women in general climb but not all the way because they have babies and stay home.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1254516' date='Apr 23 2007, 08:07 PM']As a man who makes considerably less than most women I meet (and dealing with the considerable social difficulty this creates), I personally have trouble getting worked up over this issue. (Though I realize my particular situation is an anomaly, and is really off-topic.)

I think the whole "gender-gap" issue is blown out of proportion by the media. And every account I've read indicates that the gap is closing, rather than getting worse.
I think a lot of it has to do with the fact, that as a whole, women tend to take lower-paying jobs than men. Women are less likely than men to take jobs in high-paying fields such as science/engineering, and are also less likely to be high-ranking business executives, though more and more women are rising to the top in the business world. That is probably in part, as others suggested, that women tend to be on average somewhat less aggressive, and this is a disadvantage in the cut-throat world of business.

While there may be some "institutional sexism" involved, I do not believe government should be getting involved to insure "equal" pay. That kind of government interference ultimately does more harm than good, and there are many factors which go into play when choosing how much to pay people. Women can pressure employers to pay them more (if they are doing good work, the employer may give them a raise, rather than lose a good worker), but government agencies and lawyers coming in to decide what is "fair" and "equal" pay basically amounts to socialist busybodydom, and can be very destructive and counter-productive. I am against "affirmative action" of any sort.

And (no offense to the "career women"), I am not sure that that the rising number of well-paid professional career-oriented women has entirely a positive effect on the direction of our society as a whole. From my experience, it seems that many of these female professional types become so comfortable or enwrapped in their position, that they have little interest in dating/marriage, or postpone it till late in life. And they, of course, are mostly only interested in marrying men wealthier than themselves, which narrows the field for men of lower to moderate income.

Pardon my rambling, but in short, while there may still be some genuine problems, I do not see this as some crisis demanding legal and/or government "action."[/quote]
Get ready to be shocked







ready?




really?



I agree with you! I think legislative fixes are unwarranted. I actually think that addressing this should be done in part by employers, but in part by women. They should be aware of what they're worth, and what kind of salaries they should be making. Legislative fixes here are inappropriate, imo.

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1254593' date='Apr 23 2007, 09:09 PM']Well I'm surprised it hasn't been pointed out, and no matter how simple it sounds, one reason for the gap is women tend to have babies, where as men do not. Men generally work the whole of their lives from their teenage years to retirement, each time they take on a new job they typically get paid more. Women in most cases do not work from teenage years to retirement, in most cases they have kids, quit work and stay home. This is most likely one of the causes for the gap.

Generally the people who achieve/work more are paid more. Not to say women in the work force do not work harder than men and more than men, but looking at the whole picture generally that is not the case most of the time. Its like a mountain at the top is the most paid worker, men in general climb their whole life, for themselves and family (which is the reason perhaps they are more aggressive), were as women in general climb but not all the way because they have babies and stay home.[/quote]
well the article says the disparity exists despite controlling for things like having children and other commonly identified factors. I didn't feel a need to reiterate it ...

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1254635' date='Apr 23 2007, 09:25 PM']well the article says the disparity exists despite controlling for things like having children and other commonly identified factors. I didn't feel a need to reiterate it ...[/quote]

The study found that one-quarter of the pay gap remains unexplained, which means they really don't know for sure, they seem to guess "the unexplained" 25% is sex dissemination. Which no doubt some of it is but 25%, maybe but perhaps not. I still believe most of this gap if not all can be explain by the "primal instincts" of men and women.

This is still very much with us. As in family men typically take the leadership role, the same seems to be true in about every other part of civilization, where as women typically take a more submissive role in a family compared to the man, and that seems to also be true in the business world.

Men are typically stronger, faster, and more aggressive than women. Which comes back to why women have babies and men do not, if women where as aggressive as men this would not be good for reproduction. Typically men come to anger quicker than do women, and can handle pressure better than do women. The business world is very much like nature its the survival of the fittest, the strongest in most cases wins and is rewarded, in this sense men are "built" for the business world where as women not as much.

[Socrates]

[quote name='beata_virgo_maria' post='1254591' date='Apr 23 2007, 09:09 PM']I've studied into some of the statistics involved in this and women make less than men (only 80% of what men make) in the same career fields with the same educational backgrounds as men. Also I would say that women can be very aggressive, it's just a different "type" of aggressiveness, so with men in most of the higher positions they just can't identify it as well as say another women would.

Although you are right in some senses because there have been studies that showed that women ask for pay raises less than men.[/quote]
I'm aware that there are plenty of very aggressive women out there! lol
It's just like you said, it tends to be a different "type" and female aggression tends not to play as well in business, imo.
In fact, I think agression of this kind tends to actually be very off-putting in women, and thus may not be as effective, and even act against them. I was reading somewhere that more women in business are learning that helps them to, rather than try to act like the men, play off their natural feminine strengths to their advantage.

A woman who acts overly agressive and pushy usually simply comes off as an annoying "beesh".

Edited April 24, 2007 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1254635' date='Apr 23 2007, 09:25 PM']Get ready to be shocked
ready?
really?
I agree with you! I think legislative fixes are unwarranted. I actually think that addressing this should be done in part by employers, but in part by women. They should be aware of what they're worth, and what kind of salaries they should be making. Legislative fixes here are inappropriate, imo.[/quote]
I think we actually agree alot more on things than we care to admit.