Paycheck Fairness Act

The name itself gives it away.

Paycheck... The paycheck is a contract between party A and party B. If either party A or B feels the contract is violated, then A or B may make use of the government to properly be an honest broker in adjudicating this dispute. This is obviously not the case here because this is a legislative Act. See below.

Fairness... In days of old, this term meant that party A, holding power, dispensed this power over subordinate parties, B, C, D, etc., based on a reasonable combination of merit and Godly mercy. Today, fairness instead means that party A, holding power achieved by granting favor to voting constituencies, dispenses this power to parties B, C, D, etc. based on social fashion and the concomitant ability to hold and grow A’s political power. In other words, fairness = favoritism.

Act.... An Act is a piece of legislation which dispenses power. It is not a mechanism by which the government comes to act as an honest broker between parties A and B during their contract dispute. It is instead a mechanism where government PREEMPTIVELY anticipates these disputes, and shows favoritism by dispensing power to one class of party over another, PRIOR to their being any contract disputes.

Ergo, the Paycheck Fairness Act almost certainly is an attempt by a political party to dispense power to favored constituency classes, regardless of real merit, regardless of actual contract dispute, and not with Godliness but with the pretentious ostentation of a faux God, in order to grow a political constituency by the transfer of wealth and property and labor amongst parties B, C, D, etc.

Even though it sometimes seems so, we do not have slavery in America anymore. No one is forced to accept a wage to perform a function. Any man or woman is free to decline a job if they feel they aren't being paid enough.

My operation provides thousands of job offers per year. I always chuckle when someone balks at a salary indignantly. Fine, move along. What keeps me honest? If I don't pay fairly, I can't hire the right people. And it certainly doesn't do me any favors to have inequities among staff; it may be poor form to share compensation information, but everyone does it eventually, and if unreasonable disparities exist, strife beckons.

I remember this from the 1970's feminist ERA. Basically, the government would define certain jobs as being 'pink collar' jobs, ie, teacher, nurse, administrative assistant, and certain jobs 'blue collar'. Then someone would decide what pink collar jobs were equal to the same blue collar jobs, and require companies to pay pink collar and blue collar employees the same amount. This was rightly seen as a regulatory nightmare. Who decides what a pink collar job is, or what blue collar job (if any) is similar.

The twist now is that people can file complaints with the department of gender equity or whatever and they will sue the company in question for noncompliance.

What do you care if he doesn’t let you forget it? Don’t give him any answers. Document what he says and does. Try to make sure the exchanges are by email. Keep his emails. Encourage him to go on and on about it, for weeks and months. A little clever, subtle baiting is in order. If he speaks to you, make sure there are witnesses. You might even get yourself a little pocket tape recorder, because “he has been harassing you.” You feel like he is harassing you “because you are a woman.” They sell pretty good little recorders for $20 at Target. You are a victim. You have an HR complaint and a lawsuit.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.