Posted on 05/21/2016 7:21:42 AM PDT by GilGil
Good point. If there were really such rampant discrimination, companies would not hire men at all. They would hire only women, and enjoy the 30+% discount on wages and salaries.
But this doesn’t happen.
I had to laugh at the recent report, which showed that women management personnel at the Clinton foundation were paid over 30% less than the men doing similar jobs.
“It’s already illegal to pay a woman less for the same job as a man.”
Employees are paid on production and value to the company, so 2 VP’s in the same job title can be paid differing amounts for varying reasons including length of time on the job. They can also be given bonuses for any number of things such as proficiency at achieving targeted goals.Bottom line is the more you earn for the company the more they will pay you.
A company will pay an employee what it would cost to replace him/her at his current level of production.
One would think that anyone with the same job title and job dewscription would receive equal pay. And that is true in a Union. However, in the real world that is not necessarily true. There are two other factors to take into consideration when comparing compensation. One is longevity and the other is any performance increases received in the past for exceptional work done. That goes regardless of gender. A person on the job for 10 or 15 years should receive more than someone on the job for a year, even if the job description remains the same.
How do feminists feel about the White House paying their female staffers less than male staffers? Were they outraged when Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Dianne Fiennstein (D-CA), and soon-to-be former Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), were exposed for also paying their female staffer less than their male peers, while pushing for the Paycheck Fairness Act in 2012?
“A company will pay an employee what it would cost to replace him/her at his current level of production.”
Generally speaking, of course. However, not so much today: Boeing Defense Systems has scraped off many of their mid-level business developers and program managers and replaced them with recent college grads or some that have 5-yrs or less experience. These puppies don’t know the business, don’t know the client, don’t know the operating environment. . .nor do they have the contacts or have credibility or trust with the client (military).
But. . .they pay them half as much as the retired Majs and Lt Cols and Cols. . .and one side of BDS is proud they cut personnel costs and the other side is wondering why they keep losing programs.
It’s already illegal to pay a woman less for the same job as a man.”””
“The same job” doesn’t always become “The Same results of work done”.
I have watched women twist this crap for years. They want ‘the job’——BUT-—they are not there the same number of hours as most men & most women with no kids. They come in exactly at 8 AM, and are not working before 8:05 at best. They watch the clock like a hawk & are bolting out the door at 5 PM.
Kids need dentists—doctors—and school meetings. Those women take off for those events & the rest of the group has to make sure all the work is done before they all get to go home.
The Equal Women advocates have sold 2 generations of females that “They CAN have it ALL”. They can get a good education—(great)—they can get a good job (also good)-—and then they can have a family, while leaving behind work that needs to be done.
NOW-—They want to be paid full pay for 6 weeks or longer to have that kid. As an employer-—why do I need this person who isn’t working a full week each & e very week of the year???
IT just isn’t a bit fair-—in fact, IMO, it is discrimination against women who have no kids—married or not.
Before I became self-employed, I worked in many an office where those of us who DID NOT leave early or come in late with kids issues had to do a heavier workload to keep everything up to date. I worked for years in the grocery industry-—stores open 7 days a week & paperwork for each store had to be kept up daily. Mondays were especially heavy. Those who were always absent part of the week or month were not liked much by those who always had to do the extra work to cover for them.
That was long before the PAID time off to have that kid——Today I would be more than angry. This kind of favoritism was actually a factor in my decision in going self employed with my bookkeeping skills. I get to set my own hours-—choose my own clients-—and I don’t have to deal with ‘kids issues’ & women who are absent.
These occupations - medicine, law, banking - highly reward the total focus on the job that men are more like than women to devote to it.
none of that means anything; men employers pay men more money than women because they are, well, mean...
just ask my sister in law, bless her bleeding little heart...
It’s logical, after all,
please try not to confuse the little dears with logic...
Perhaps I should have prefaced my statement by saying, “generally speaking”
Some people just don’t do facts.
Or perhaps because they prefer comfortable jobs on comfortable schedules?
How many women fix roofs in the hot August sun, fix power lines in the middle of a sleet-storm, pick up trash cans all day, work as night-shift convenience-store cashier in the "inner city"? If the job is dangerous, inconvenient, uncomfortable, or nasty, chances are that it's predominantly performed by men, who then expect premium pay in exchange for the conditions.
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.