Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[fleabitten]

The report explains the pay gap pretty well on the 2nd page under "About this fact sheet". Basically it covers all the reasons that Sommers mentioned when she was discrediting the myth. If you want to look at the pay gap as evidence that there are less women in senior positions or that more women have a more precarious attachment to the workforce (due to unpaid caring commitments at home) or that historically female-dominated jobs are undervalued and underpaid, then okay.

But it's not presented that way. It's presented as though men and women are doing the same work for the same hours with the same qualifications and experience, and the men are being paid significantly more. That's being intellectually dishonest. If companies could get away with doing that, then why would anyone hire men? If you can hire a woman who is just as capable and pay her 20% less, then it would be stupid not to do that.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

But what's the definition of 'laborer'? Does it include foremen? Does 'retail worker' include managers?

I'm not trying to argue that the paygap is a complete myth, but variables like, what each profession is strictly defined as, what positions were included, when people were hired, etc. seem like the kind of thing that should really be on that page. The whole point of doing research like that is that people don't have to argue context and technical details. All the obvious questions should already be answered, leaving things too open to interpretation lets confirmation bias and scepticism devalue the whole study.

I'm almost certain there are better studies/writeups than that one in particular though.

There is a seperate category for managers.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

The report explains the pay gap pretty well on the 2nd page under "About this fact sheet". Basically it covers all the reasons that Sommers mentioned when she was discrediting the myth. If you want to look at the pay gap as evidence that there are less women in senior positions or that more women have a more precarious attachment to the workforce (due to unpaid caring commitments at home) or that historically female-dominated jobs are undervalued and underpaid, then okay.

But it's not presented that way. It's presented as though men and women are doing the same work for the same hours with the same qualifications and experience, and the men are being paid significantly more. That's being intellectually dishonest. If companies could get away with doing that, then why would anyone hire men? If you can hire a woman who is just as capable and pay her 20% less, then it would be stupid not to do that.

How do you explain the discrepancies in pay when it comes to low and semi skilled occupations?

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Males work longer hours, are more likely to do overtime, etc. etc.

If Women cost 20% less I reckon some savvy businessman would have worked out that hiring only females is a pretty decent business model.

Did you read the report?

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

I read what was posted, I'm not bothering to read the link.

If you had have, you would have seen that the wage data is based on ordinary time earnings. Overtime is not a factor.

 

[scon]

The factsheet does identify numbers of males in more senior positions as a factor which amplifies the discrepancy.You'd think it would be the major factor.
I once worked short handed on a Gulf prawn trawler.We should have had 5 workers but only had 3.Skipper,myself and a female worker.Skipper took 50% and the female and I shared 50%.She did the cooking I did the engine room,we both worked the back deck together and did our share of watches etc.
I told the skipper(male) I thought she was being short-changed...he simply said forget it just make sure there's no breakdowns.
I've worked in professional environments where there was pay equality.Same work,same pay would surely be the rule rather than the exception in Australia.
FROM THE FACTSHEET

"Other factors that contribute to the gender pay gap include:
a lack of women in senior positions, and a lack of part
-
time or flexible senior roles. Women are more likely
than men to work part
-
time or flexibly because they still undertake most of society’s unpaid caring work
and may find it difficult to access senior roles

women’s more precarious attachment to the workforce (largely due to their
unpaid caring responsibilities)

differences in education, work experience and seniority

discrimination, both direct and indirect"

Seems to reiterate what Gail Kelly was saying:
Westpac's Gail Kelly retires and now it's even lonelier for the ...

 

[fleabitten]

How do you explain the discrepancies in pay when it comes to low and semi skilled occupations?

The same way? A labourer will still be paid more with more experience or if he/she has attained certain licenses that make them more valuable. Also, if you check on page 9 of the report, it shows that women actually earn 2.5% more than men when you look at jobs that pay award rates.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Average weekly full-time earnings. Men work more hours. How does that not refute the 'pay gap'.

Once again, if females are so much cheaper to hire than why doesn't everyone hire females and increase profits.

You are completely incorrect. It uses OTE to avoid a miscomparison that would occur when comparing people who work different hours.

 

[The_Reaper]

How do you explain the discrepancies in pay when it comes to low and semi skilled occupations?

Men low and semi skilled occupations are generally hired for physical labour.

 

[fleabitten]

The argument that traditionally female jobs are undervalued and underpaid is a good one. I've worked in those fields myself (where I sometimes faced discrimination as a potential sex offender) and agree that they should be better paid. You can argue for better pay for teachers and child care workers and nurses and carers without it being a gender issue though. In fact making that a gender issue would be sexist.

 

[SpuriousPea]

It's an earnings gap.

And it won't change until women stop shitting out kids. Which is an impossibility.

So embrace the outcome of your own choices and stop playing the victim.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

I don't know what that means, because I know nothing about business. I'll assume you are correct.

So why don't businesses hire a ton of females to reduce costs? That's the main logic I use when I justify the logic of my own views.

Perhaps they are:
Seasonally adjusted full-time employment increased by 33,400 persons to 8,058,500 persons while part-time employment decreased by 9,400 to 3,533,700 persons in October 2014. The increase in total employment resulted from:

• an increase in female full-time employment, up 26,100 persons
• an increase in male full-time employment, up 7,300 persons
  http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@...ummary&prodno=6202.0&issue=Oct 2014&num=&view=

 

[fleabitten]

It's an earnings gap.

And it won't change until women stop shitting out kids. Which is an impossibility.

So embrace the outcome of your own choices and stop playing the victim.

Nope, that's not it. As mentioned a few times, the gap is based on the same amount of hours worked. There are other explanations apart from discrimination though.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

It's an earnings gap.

And it won't change until women stop shitting out kids. Which is an impossibility.

So embrace the outcome of your own choices and stop playing the victim.

Why did you use a graph about working hours in Canada?
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=19

 

[scon]

Or a phrase like "..@#$tting out kids"

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Or a phrase like "..@#$tting out kids"

I suspect that is how he came into this world.

 

[SpuriousPea]

Nope, that's not it. As mentioned a few times, the gap is based on the same amount of hours worked. There are other explanations apart from discrimination though.

Comparing "full time" earnings is not comparing same hours worked.

Why did you use a graph about working hours in Canada?
http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=19

So? Australia and Canada are incomparable?

Here's our gap:

And when men and women work 50 or more hours a week:

 

[SpuriousPea]

Or a phrase like "..@#$tting out kids"

I suspect that is how he came into this world.

Oh noes, he's a meanie.

And zero ****s were given.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Comparing "full time" earnings is not comparing same hours worked.


So? Australia and Canada are incomparable?

Here's our gap:

And when men and women work 50 or more hours a week:

Do you have a source for those graphs? I assume the one that is 10 years out of date is an ABS one?

Also, as has been noted a number of times, the pay statistics are based on the same number of hours (AWOTE)

 

[telsor]

If you had have, you would have seen that the wage data is based on ordinary time earnings. Overtime is not a factor.

Perhaps, but those who do more overtime are more likely to be promoted, etc. leading to better 'ordinary time' earnings.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Perhaps, but those who do more overtime are more likely to be promoted, etc. leading to better 'ordinary time' earnings.

Fair point. Do we have any data that indicates men work more overtime than women?

 

[Richard Pryor]

Fair point. Do we have any data that indicates men work more overtime than women?

Unfortunately the vast majority of material on this issue is pretty bias and unreliable, https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/articles/?id=2160, this seems to be a fairly impartial source (albeit focused on the US)

A recent report prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor analyzed the gender wage gap using Current Population Survey (CPS) data for 2007.3 The report takes into account differences between men and women in educational attainment, work experience, occupation, career interruptions, part-time status and overtime worked. The result is striking—these factors explain approximately three-fourths of the 2007 raw gender hourly wage gap of 20.4 percent. The adjusted 2007 gender hourly wage gap is roughly 5 percent.4

Gender roles, as opposed to active discrimination, are responsible for the majority of the wage gap according to this report, (not to say 5 percent is by any means an irrelevant number).

 

[skilts]

My reaction or the reason I think they're doing it? If you mean my reaction, then sorry but I'm not always quick-witted enough to react to a catcaller if I only have a matter of seconds to do so. Looking at them like they're a dickhead has to do sometimes.

You are under no obligation other than to avert your eyes and ears. The comment was directed towards the knuckle-dragging neanderthals.

 

[SpuriousPea]

Do you have a source for those graphs? I assume the one that is 10 years out of date is an ABS one?

Also, as has been noted a number of times, the pay statistics are based on the same number of hours (AWOTE)

The sources are on the images.

AWOTE is not comparing same hours worked specifically, but any standard or agreed work over the 35+ hour full time cutoff. So a physical therapist working 38 hours a week is directly compared to a heavy industry project manager working 55+ hours per week, for example.

 

[fleabitten]

Agree, if there was reliable info to say that it's a 5% pay gap that can be wholly attributed to discrimination, that's something that needs to be addressed. Sommers believes that it's likely that a few percentage points of the gap are the result of bias against women. So let's address that problem. Starting out with ridiculous claims of 20-25% that are very easily debunked just makes the whole issue look like BS.