We need to close that gap, too.
Glad I’m not there. JimRob needs to flee.
Freepers need to flee. Break out the popcorn and let California do its thing. Just prevent federal bailout.
Sounds like the Ca Legislature is Going Full On, War on Women, this will undoubtedly impact Females in a very negative way. Ought to be interesting to watch.
Any law that tries to overthrow real supply and demand simply doesn't work and I'd be very surprised if this one works the way they think it will.
Get a life, Santa Cruz!
Reason #1,432 to not start a business in California
Maddox: Not safe for work or anyone especially if you're humor impaired.
Men tend to take a job and work there longer.
Women take maternity leaves. one, two, three... This costs an employer
Women may or may not come back from a maternity leave. They may decide to stay home. They may decide to apply for another position while they are out. The employer has to retrain, start over with a new eimployee.
White the woman is out on maternity leave, the other male employees will be asked to cover. That may be find when one woman leaves. What happens when three do at exactly the same time?
I worked at a place that had 13 staff members in one classification. Three of the female members of this classification got together and PLANNED to become pregnant at the same time. And they did. 3 of 13 employees went on long maternity leaves at the same time. 1. One female employee had a normal nine month experience and delivery, then maternity leave. 2. This female employee developed a case of extreme nausea and had to stay in bed for nearly nine months. She barely survived. The child was born healthy. She returned to work months after the delivery. She took another position a few years later. 3. This female came down with cancer related to pregnancy. As soon as she became pregnant, she was ravaged by the disease. I'm not sure what the type of cancer was, but she barely made it out alive. Surprisingly, the child was born healthy. They took it early, and then began treatment on the mom. I believe she was healthy after treatments. She never returned to work. Women never take this into consideration when they complain about equal pay. Neither do their ombudsmen. I will say, the male employees who had to fill in for these women for a year sure were aware of it. In ten five or ten years, a woman can take 1 to 3 maternity leaves. Should they get the same pay as the guy who remains on the job the whole ten years? If I was working and had some healthy issues, I know I wouldn't feel right about taking my boss to task for paying others more. I also recognize that women have a right to have children, and that shouldn't be held against them either. And I realize their husbands and family count on her income too. So I am somewhat sympathetic to this argument. None the less, an employer should have a reasonable expectation of equal work for an equal period of time, if salaries are to be equal. If a woman is off for a year, should she get cost of living raises? Should the men forgo theirs? If a woman is off for three or four months, should she get her full cost of living raise? Ladies, feel free to jump in. If I'm mischaracterizing this or being unfair, it should be noted.
Men tend to take a job and work there longer.
Women take maternity leaves. one, two, three... This costs an employer
Women may or may not come back from a maternity leave. They may decide to stay home. They may decide to apply for another position while they are out. The employer has to retrain, start over with a new eimployee.
White the woman is out on maternity leave, the other male employees will be asked to cover. That may be find when one woman leaves. What happens when three do at exactly the same time?
I worked at a place that had 13 staff members in one classification. Three of the female members of this classification got together and PLANNED to become pregnant at the same time. And they did.
3 of 13 employees went on long maternity leaves at the same time. They never gave it a second thought, while the guys on the staff had to work extra shifts to fill in as salaried employees.
1. One female employee had a normal nine month experience and delivery, then maternity leave.
2. This female employee developed a case of extreme nausea and had to stay in bed for nearly nine months. She barely survived. The child was born healthy. She returned to work months after the delivery. She took another position a few years later.
3. This female came down with cancer related to pregnancy. As soon as she became pregnant, she was ravaged by the disease. I'm not sure what the type of cancer was, but she barely made it out alive. Surprisingly, the child was born healthy. They took it early, and then began treatment on the mom. I believe she was healthy after treatments. She never returned to work.
Women never take this into consideration when they complain about equal pay. Neither do their ombudsmen. I will say, the male employees who had to fill in for these women for a year sure were aware of it.
In ten five or ten years, a woman can take 1 to 3 maternity leaves. Should they get the same pay as the guy who remains on the job the whole ten years?
If I was working and had some healthy issues, I know I wouldn't feel right about taking my boss to task for paying others more.
I also recognize that women have a right to have children, and that shouldn't be held against them either. And I realize their husbands and family count on her income too. So I am somewhat sympathetic to this argument. None the less, an employer should have a reasonable expectation of equal work for an equal period of time, if salaries are to be equal.
If a woman is off for a year, should she get cost of living raises? Should the men forgo theirs? If a woman is off for three or four months, should she get her full cost of living raise?
Ladies, feel free to jump in. If I'm mischaracterizing this or being unfair, it should be noted.
Okay ladies, if the law passes, nobody is going to be stupid enough to hire ANY women.
The Gender Pay Gap is a Complete Myth (excerpt)
- Men are far more likely to choose careers that are more dangerous, so they naturally pay more.
- Men are far more likely to work in higher-paying fields and occupations (by choice).
- Men are far more likely to take work in uncomfortable, isolated, and undesirable locations that pay more.Men work longer hours than women do. The average fulltime working man works 6 hours per week or 15 percent longer than the average fulltime working woman.
- Men are more likely to take jobs that require work on weekends and evenings and therefore pay more.
- Despite all of the above, unmarried women who’ve never had a child actually earn more than unmarried men.
- Women business owners make less than half of what male business owners make, which, since they have no boss, means it’s independent of discrimination.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/
the wage gap is the biggest myth 30 years ago there was on today when you look at experience on the job I believe women are actually being paid more....the problem is that when women have kids they usually end up raising them making it harder to get ahead in the work force....taking years off being in the work force hurts your earning potential and between your late 20s and early 30s is your time to pay your dues to get the higher paying jobs. if you quit working or go to part time you are going to effect wages when measured as a group.
Instead of "equal pay for equal work" they want to implement "Equal pay for jobs of comparable worth." Comparable worth will of course be determined by government bureaucrats, not the free market, thus crippling employers' ability to set their own rates for pay and compensation. They will be required to apply to the government to determine how much they must pay their employees.
This bill is a step in that direction.
California, the cereal state.
5.56mm