Article
Excerpt from BNet (CBS's online business network) article relating to a recent contentious debate:
Quote:
...the AFL-CIO and the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) released Equal Pay for Working Families: National and State Data on the Pay Gap and Its Costs. {...} If these groups are to be believed, then American women are still second-class citizens, as they were before they had the right to vote. But before declaring another crisis, it is worth looking at how these numbers were put together and some of the reasons behind the differences.
{...} The 74 percent figure is derived by comparing the average median wage of all full-time working men and women. To obtain figures for individual states, average wages of men and women within that state are compared. So older workers are compared to younger, social workers to police officers, and, since full-time means any number of hours above 35 a week (and sometimes fewer), those working 60-hour weeks are compared with those working 35-hour weeks. These estimates fail to consider key factors in determining wages, including education, age, experience, and, perhaps most importantly, consecutive years in the workforce. That is why in States such as Louisiana, where it is less common for women to work, and where they have less education and work experience, the wage gap is wider. In areas where it is more usual for women to work, such as the District of Columbia, the gap is smaller. But this average wage gap, as it is known, says nothing about whether individuals with the same qualifications who are in the same jobs are discriminated against.
When discrimination occurs, and, as readers know all too well, it does occur, our nation has laws to deal with it. We need to [...] apply the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Pay Act to eradicate cases of discrimination.
How much less do equally-qualified women make? Surprisingly, given all the misused statistics, they make about the same. Economists have long known that the adjusted wage gap between men and women--the difference in wages adjusted for occupation, age, experience, education, and time in the workforce--is far smaller than the average wage gap. {Lifted from later in the article: the earnings of a man or a woman with a B.A. in English is not the same as the earnings of a man or a woman with a B.A. in math. [Me: We need more girls in math and science. Really, this is something that nationally should be a goal. Women are not inately inferior in math and science!] }
The wage gap shrinks dramatically when multiple factors are considered. Women with similar levels of education and consecutive years of experience earn as much as their male counterparts. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, economics professor June O'Neill found that, among people ages twenty-seven to thirty-three who have never had a child, women's earnings are close to 98 percent of men's. Professor O'Neill notes that "when earnings comparisons are restricted to men and women more similar in their experience and life situations, the measured earnings differentials are typically quite small."
What about the remaining gap, often referred to as the unexplained statistical residual? Economists Solomon Polachek and Claudia Goldin suggest that different expectations of future employment, or human capital investment, may explain the residual..."
I do not agree with everything in this article, though I do consider it important to look at the variables contained within statistics such as the socio-economic divides (opportunity is not evenly distributed between all classes and that too is an inequality) and demographics (age and race for example. People of color or of certain ethnic backgrounds suffer disproportionately). Also there are many factors at play in family planning involving issues of economics, necessity, practicality, culture, and gender. Statistics are not just the headline. These issues are complex.
And while we're at it, thank you to the last congress and President Obama for passing and signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
In other news, Modern Family was hilarious last night.
Quote:
...the AFL-CIO and the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) released Equal Pay for Working Families: National and State Data on the Pay Gap and Its Costs. {...} If these groups are to be believed, then American women are still second-class citizens, as they were before they had the right to vote. But before declaring another crisis, it is worth looking at how these numbers were put together and some of the reasons behind the differences.
{...} The 74 percent figure is derived by comparing the average median wage of all full-time working men and women. To obtain figures for individual states, average wages of men and women within that state are compared. So older workers are compared to younger, social workers to police officers, and, since full-time means any number of hours above 35 a week (and sometimes fewer), those working 60-hour weeks are compared with those working 35-hour weeks. These estimates fail to consider key factors in determining wages, including education, age, experience, and, perhaps most importantly, consecutive years in the workforce. That is why in States such as Louisiana, where it is less common for women to work, and where they have less education and work experience, the wage gap is wider. In areas where it is more usual for women to work, such as the District of Columbia, the gap is smaller. But this average wage gap, as it is known, says nothing about whether individuals with the same qualifications who are in the same jobs are discriminated against.
When discrimination occurs, and, as readers know all too well, it does occur, our nation has laws to deal with it. We need to [...] apply the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Pay Act to eradicate cases of discrimination.
How much less do equally-qualified women make? Surprisingly, given all the misused statistics, they make about the same. Economists have long known that the adjusted wage gap between men and women--the difference in wages adjusted for occupation, age, experience, education, and time in the workforce--is far smaller than the average wage gap. {Lifted from later in the article: the earnings of a man or a woman with a B.A. in English is not the same as the earnings of a man or a woman with a B.A. in math. [Me: We need more girls in math and science. Really, this is something that nationally should be a goal. Women are not inately inferior in math and science!] }
The wage gap shrinks dramatically when multiple factors are considered. Women with similar levels of education and consecutive years of experience earn as much as their male counterparts. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, economics professor June O'Neill found that, among people ages twenty-seven to thirty-three who have never had a child, women's earnings are close to 98 percent of men's. Professor O'Neill notes that "when earnings comparisons are restricted to men and women more similar in their experience and life situations, the measured earnings differentials are typically quite small."
What about the remaining gap, often referred to as the unexplained statistical residual? Economists Solomon Polachek and Claudia Goldin suggest that different expectations of future employment, or human capital investment, may explain the residual..."
I do not agree with everything in this article, though I do consider it important to look at the variables contained within statistics such as the socio-economic divides (opportunity is not evenly distributed between all classes and that too is an inequality) and demographics (age and race for example. People of color or of certain ethnic backgrounds suffer disproportionately). Also there are many factors at play in family planning involving issues of economics, necessity, practicality, culture, and gender. Statistics are not just the headline. These issues are complex.
And while we're at it, thank you to the last congress and President Obama for passing and signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
In other news, Modern Family was hilarious last night.