The Lie of Male/Female Pay Disparity

Apr 03, 2012 02:05

So I saw another study lamenting the disparity in pay between men and women. This one tells us that "Corporations Pay Women CFOs 16 Percent Less Than Men". My answer is so what? Is that supposed to be some sort of injustice? Let's apply some logic ( Read more... )

women's rights, corporations

Leave a comment

Comments 94

curseangel April 3 2012, 00:19:00 UTC
The words I have for you are not appropriate for this forum. Please allow me to take a moment to compose something involving less invectives.

Sexism is a very real thing, and it effects hiring practices in more ways than mere money. You see, the sexist societal norms which dictate that women should be paid less than men for the same work also dictate that women cannot work at the same level as men (even though they obviously can), and that women should be subordinate to men. Because of these sexist societal norms, women find it difficult to gain promotions (ever heard of the "glass ceiling"?) and there are very, very few women in positions of power, especially as high up on the food chain as, say, CEOs. So sexism not only means that women who attain positions of power are paid less, but also that there are less women available to take those positions of power -- and it is less likely that those who are qualified would be selected over a male applicant ( ... )

Reply

foreverbeach April 3 2012, 00:20:45 UTC
So wait, if this is true, why doesn't a progressive corporation, hire women and put the misogynist corporations out of business? The misogynist corporations are OVERPAYING FOR LABOR.

Reply

hamiltonia April 3 2012, 00:48:02 UTC
curseangel's point

your head

Reply

my_wits_end April 3 2012, 04:30:31 UTC
Hiring a woman as CFO is a risk for a corporation because misogyny is a fact of the matter. The decreased pay women receive is a reflection of their undervalued status. Since they are undervalued, women are likely going to face more difficulties in their work than men in the same position. It seems that many corporations do not want to take on this risk and are willing to pay more for a man.

Reply


kylinrouge April 3 2012, 00:25:33 UTC
If women really do the same quality and quantity of work as men, if they bring the same shareholder value to the corporation as men,

The problem is that corporations don't have this view.

Reply

foreverbeach April 3 2012, 00:27:09 UTC
They don't have that view because they're wrong or because that view is wrong?

Reply

kylinrouge April 3 2012, 00:47:30 UTC
I don't know, it's just you derived your conclusion from that premise and somehow inverted the problem.

Reply

houndofloki April 3 2012, 15:36:06 UTC
There are a variety of reasons for it ( ... )

Reply


anfalicious April 3 2012, 01:02:57 UTC
The main issue with pay disparity is that female dominated industries (nursing, teaching, aged care, etc) are less well remunerated for similar skills, risks and effort than male dominated industries.

Reply

il_mio_gufo April 3 2012, 03:02:50 UTC
ding ding ding*** i think you pinned it!

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

my_wits_end April 3 2012, 11:15:05 UTC
It's a misconception that women get paid less for doing exactly the same job, because that's illegal in ~most~ countries, but the fact that a woman is less likely to get the higher paid ones for those reasons above is what contributes to the pay disparity figures.

Similarly, it's a misconception that people smoke marijuana in the US, because that's illegal in ~most~ states.

While I agree it doesn't make sense to compare part-time to full time, I can only assume that you are unfamiliar with the statistics showing that women are paid less for full-time year round work than men working the same. And please explain why you think the potential to get pregnant ought to be a valid reason to discriminate against a woman who does not intend to have children.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

harry_beast April 3 2012, 17:56:07 UTC
Maybe or maybe not. Disparities to the disadvantage of men don't usually have the same priority. An example of this is the gender gap in college enrollment and graduation. Men are usually expected to just suck it up.

Reply

my_wits_end April 4 2012, 08:37:19 UTC
Because men are being systematically excluded from enrolling in and graduating from college.

...

Reply

harry_beast April 4 2012, 22:32:58 UTC
Unlike being a CEO, something that maybe one in a thousand people ever get to do, access to higher education affects a large part of the population. If you're right about men being systematically excluded, it is not only a grave injustice, but also a impediment to the country's workforce productivity and social stability.

Reply


rasilio April 3 2012, 01:37:50 UTC
While I generally agree with you that the gender gap in salaries is largely a factor of comparing apples to oranges (for example Females CFO's in aggregate would get paid less because 25 years ago there were so few of them meaning that far more male CFO's have decades of experience comparable to males) however there is a flaw in your argument.

The link between what salary you pay an executive and corporate profitability and the actual incentives of the person making the hiring decision is tenuous at best,hi it can easily be that executives charged with hiring a CFO are more swayed by their own personal biases than they are by the pay differiential than women offer.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

rasilio April 3 2012, 04:18:06 UTC
Thanks, unfortunately I won't be able to be anywhere near as active as I used to be but my new job has me commuting an hour each way on a wi fi enabled train giving me the luxury of time with no real responsibilities with which to make the occasional post in here.

Reply

htpcl April 3 2012, 06:08:17 UTC
Take the longer commuter route then!

Reply


Leave a comment

Up