but we all get penalized

... But the amount that do take the time are likely significant enough to affect the stats.

I was actually TOLD that early in my career

during an interview i was asked whether i planned to have any children in the near future. there were several other misogynist or sexist questions. six years later, this company was sued in a class action lawsuit for discrimination toward women.

Are the numbers brought down because a certain percentage of women will take X number of time off to have children, thus reducing their careers and earning potential... Or would a woman who stuck straight through with no time off or even the hint of it close in on equal earning potential?

I suspect it is something in-between the two...

in the end though, all things considered, women still generally get the shaft - I think because women are seen as demanding and pushy if they try to negotiate salaries the way men do

New fathers actually start working more hours and asking for raises/promotions figuring they will need more money for the family.

New mothers start asking for more time off.

What do you think the long term results of that dynamic will be? It's common sense.

When you look at women age 24-34 who are unmarried and without children, the wage gap with men practically vanishes. Once she gets married and/or has children children, it changes. She falls behind her male peers and never catches up.

why is that? I bet it gets wider as the single gal ages......the "negotiating skills" part is bunk, because women are seen as demanding and pushy if they use the same tactics as men

More than a few times I have found out I was making less than the guys I was training - when I asked the bosses why, I was told because those guys had kids! So women are penalized for having kids, while men are rewarded - that is some kind of shyte.

Society as a whole still see men as the providers and women as caretakers. Still a lot of progress to be made in that realm.

Old habits die hard. And society has a lot of ancient ones still alive. There is still a lot of people out there who are "traditional" and conservative and religious. And it keeps a lot of those old traditions and perceptions going strong. The media and marketing also doesn't help.

"New fathers actually start working more hours and asking for raises/promotions..."
"New mothers start asking for more time off..."

You of course, have objective and peer-reviewed sources to support your allegations, yes?

on the teacher salary committee that negotiated the teacher salary schedule with the district.

In our research we were surprised to find that a 30 year old male teacher with a master's degree made not just m,ore money, but significantly more money than a 30 year old female teacher with a master's degree.

Of course this was quite a shock because the district had a salary schedule where teachers made the same based on experience and education regardless of sex.

When looking into the problem, there were two main causes we found.

1. The average 30 year old male teacher had more years of experience than the average 30 year old female teacher. This was seen as directly related to some women taking some years off to raise their children.

2. The average 30 year old male teacher was much more likely to work extra duties (coaching, etc) than the average female teacher. Our district had a problem with female sports teams (this was 30 years ago). We hated men coaching women's teams but couldn't get enough women to volunteer. When we asked women teachers why this was, the most often given answer was they had to be home when the kids got home from school because their husband didn't get home till after 5.

So, in short, even in an occupation where there couldn't be a pay difference between the sexes because their was a non-sex salary schedule, there was still a major difference in pay.

When we asked for solutions, the only reasonable suggestion we got was that women shouldn't be penalized for taking years off. If a male teacher worked eight years he should get eight years experience credited to him. If a women worked six years and took two years off to raise the kids, she should still be credited with eight years experience. We did not suggest that to the district as we thought it was more unfair than fair.

It doesn't control for men working longer hours, more overtime, riskier working conditions, outside vs inside work, career choices, fringe benefit choices, taking care of children and other family members, and a dozen or so other things that are deeply divided by gender.

So if you think about it, all it really tells you is men tend to spend more time as a wage slave, working in more arduous conditions, more often in riskier positions, and are more likely to work outside in all weather conditions vs working inside in a climate controlled office, all of which are related to choice.

Naturally if the article were framed by choice rather than something intended to mislead one into believing this is study on equal pay for equal work, the click bait value would be severely diminished.

I calculated what being female cost me in lower pay and slower promotions. And I was always the "star" performer, just not paid the same as men. I traveled for the job, a true "road warrior". It cost me between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

And in case you wonder about my career, it was in computers. Started as a programmer, then systems analyst, then team leader, then manage, then director, etc. I just got paid less. Of course, I never knew that at the time since "salaries are secret"

What fun is that?

you are arguing they ought to be paid more because they are men.

They have opportunities women don't and you are trying to paint that as victimization.

If I welder working 50 hours a week earns more than a preschool teacher working 40, so be it. I think men should be free to take up preschool teaching, and women free to take up welding. But men tend to work more hours, and often have more dangerous jobs. I see nothing wrong with those jobs paying more. If they are refusing to hire qualified women, that is a problem, but if the average woman doesn't want to pursue that job, that is ok too.

"all it really tells you is..."

Inaccurate. You inferred merely one many possible conclusions. Irrational.

so how should that be used against them to say they ought to make less without it being sexist?

A woman who spends the same amount of time on the job should receive equal pay.

A woman who has two or three years less than that, having taken than time to have a kid or teo, should expect to have lower earnings since they weren't there and may have missed some key milestones in a traditional career.

And paid paternity leave as well.

If women get paid 83% what men do, a business could save a lot on labor, yet not one person has tried it. Hell O might go in and fire all the men tommorow.

for some unknown, counter-capitalist, nonsensical reason?

Show me a workplace where fixed salary positions are tiered by sex, independent of other factors and I'll show you a soon to be rich plaintiff.

It's fantasy.

I am a flight simulator technician. I have been doing it since 1998. A very male dominated field. In the time I have been doing it I have worked with one female- she started at our place about 2 years ago. She got on because she knew someone, but she has been one of the smartest and hardest working techs I have ever worked with. The problem with some jobs is that woman must work twice as good to be considered equal to men. It is crazy.

Inherent sexism means more to people than saving money.

The companies that have more women would dominate every sector of the economy if women made 79 cents on the dollar.

Don't forget that much of our labor, that in the home, is still slave labor, unpaid and not counting toward retirement.

Then there's the wee bit about getting paid less and charged more for the goods and services we need.

Domestic chores are a fact of life. I do the vast majority of them in our home, as my wife sucks at cooking, cleaning, and all that. Am I her slave? Does she owe me back pay?


Christ.

on top of domestic labor, child-care, and "emotional labor" in relationships that is still disproportionately performed by women. We face greater ageism/sexism later in life so face the emotional toll of being left by first husbands seeking younger partners. We also have longer lifespans, greater sensitivity to pain, and more disbelief by doctors in treating that pain and other medical conditions, so that adds to the material and emotional cost burden as well.

No one is going to pay you money to clean your own house and do your own laundry. That's ridiculous.

If you don't want to do your husband's laundry....then don't! No one is forcing you!

I'll remember that next time I'm cleaning gutters...

I mean, I do ALL of the work in this home, and do not get paid a dime for it. Of course, I guess I am both the slave and the owner, at once. I am pretty sure if I was married, I would still be doing some work around the house. The roof I fixed last summer - probably still would have done that myself. The bike tire I pumped up tonight. Well, my wife would do that if I asked real nice.


Right.

And of course, if two people were living in this house that would reduce the per/person cost. Same with the trash, and other utilities. I could have a family of five in this house and pay the same trash bill.

Two of my sisters seem to have married fairly rich men. Is that also part of the cost of being a woman?

And should be a top priority all around the world. The state of women's rights is terrible.

when they are for the exact same item, just with "girly" colors and marketing.

A tax for being female.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/22/women-really-do-pay-more-for-razors-and-almost-everything-else/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/women-paying-more-than-men-for-everyday-product-thanks-to-unacceptable-gender-price-gap-a6820816.html

Damned pink disposable razors cost 2 x what the SAME blue or black ones do. It's horse shit. I buy the BLUE ones.

Tampons are taxed as "luxury" items. There is a movement afoot to make them tax free or better yet, TOTALLY free (as we know damn well they would be if men had to use them):

They shouldn't cost more, and they aren't double in any case, but why on earth would you pay more for a thing because some marketing asshole made it pink? That's more of a tax on stupid people than on women.

The tampon thing is complete bullshit. They should be tax-free, or better yet covered under the ACA at 100%. Come to think of it, why aren't they?

They are taxed the same as razors, deodorant, bandages and other hygiene items.

I would argue is that female hygiene products are needed for about a week a month for every woman in that stage of life... men use razors but women use more since there is far more body hair they usually remove.. they do this so that men won't be repulsed by their hair. It costs a hell of a lot more to be female, in some ways that are impossible to articulate.

Im fine with that, but I think its dumb to make it sound like some lawmaker wrote law saying only tampons should be taxed.

tampons are being taxed at a higher rate.

aka "luxury" items. See my post above. It's ridiculous.

Often are taxed at rates higher than normal sales taxes. These are known as "sumptuary taxes". Jewelry often gets the extra tax. In many states, "food and drugs" are exempt from taxes where hygeine items are not.

...and women's hygiene products are a "luxury" and to be taxed when other necessities (food and drugs) are not -- OR taxed at a higher rate as "sumptuary"?

How many women think that monthly thing is a "luxury"?

If men had this, would the products necessary to deal with it be considered a "luxury" or "non-necessary"

You know they would not.

It's ridiculous.

They are taxed at the same rate as razors, face soap, deodorant, shampoo, combs, mouthwash, elderly incontinence diapers, baby diapers, and talcum powder. They do not receive the preferential sales tax treatment that food and medicine get.

Singles of both sexes are first to go when lay-offs come. Like just having kids qualify you more or something. It's not our fault people have kids they can't afford. And then if you're gay, you have no spouse to leave your retirement to or to collect from. SSI under Bernie may help make up some of these losses. We know Hillary Coattails won't help us. She'll want us to work longer.

that this is absolutely true.

`"single" issue all my life too.

Bernie has nothing to do with it. Bernie cannot do anything to change SSI with a Republican Congress. Geez Bernie supporters are so obsessed they bring him up when he has nothing to do with it as it is a long term cultural issue.

Is there any real proof single people are laid off first?

that males go into higher paying jobs (law, finance, medical specialty) while women go into lower paying jobs (social workers, teachers, service industry)? Hours put in? Physical nature of the job?

Else this statistic is just garbage...

I would presume anyway.

From law school than men. Wages have dramatically dropped in the field, if they find jobs at all.

It's been a hot topic lately-there are articles everywhere about it. Stats also show that women will soon overtake men entering med school.

tend to end up in-house while equity partners of large law firms are overwhelmingly male

It's being flooded. There are too many tier 3 and tier 4 law schools. And it's flooding the market. The wages are falling and considering the massive cost it takes to go to law school, a lot of kids who were looking into it ultimately decide it's just not worth it.

20-30 years ago, you get into law school, get decent grades, you can get out and find a pretty good-paying job. It was a good bet. And the tuition was lower. Not that way anymore. People are coming out of law school today with $150,000+ of student loans and are lucky to fund a $35k job. It's bad.

Male enrollment in college, altogether, is falling. It's not just law school. And I think cost is probably becoming a big part of the issue. Young men see the job market stalling and stagnating and don't want to take on any significant debt.

and if you ask my 15 year old son why, he will tell you that all the mean (my words) girls are enrolling in college and it is chasing all of the men who used to have college as a 'man cave'.

He also insists it is not white men who rule this country, it is women. We have all the power and we get pregnant just to trap a guy for 18 years.

I have no idea how to deprogram him and feel like such a bad liberal and mom. I fear he will not find a healthy and happy relationship with the sites he visits. I would take away his computer except he does so much school work on it.

Like the comparison where plumbers and secretaries should receive equal pay because both of them only require a high school education. It doesn't take into account working conditions and whether or not a line of work is attractive to women.

Feminists refuse to control for lifestyle choices.

The average woman probably spend 5 times more for clothes and beauty, hair care etc than men do.

....they catch all sorts of insults and are degraded as humans for that too (spoken and unspoken, overly and covertly)

Damned if they do.

Damned if they don't.

Women can't just flop on a couch or in a grungy apt. the way a guy can.

LOL! Florida is #1 in something good for a change!

My own male lifetime earnings will be lucky to reach $350,000.

It's enough to make me feel bad for Jennifer Lawrence.

She is just as much, if not more, of a box office draw as her costars. I know my kid doesn't give a damn about Bradley Cooper or Christian Bale but if she hears,about a new Lawrence movie she plans on seeing it. And my kid isn't the only one.

If box office receipts dictate salary Lawrence should make just as much, if not in some cases more than her male costars. She was the star of a mega franchise, numerous nominations, numerous awards and one Academy Award. She's done everything she should be expected to do and should be drawing the same pay- It's only fair.

(I know it's more than I'll ever see but that's not the point. If she's at the same place, if not actually a higher position in her career as her male costars she should be making the same.)

that she is worth about $60,000,000 so I could give a rat's ass if she makes 1% of what her male co-stars make. That is not a real problem. She's free to take or reject any offer she gets.

And given the numbers in this article, it looks like I would be happy to trade salaries with their average woman.

I still support her because she should be equal to her costars.

for clothes, medical care, etc.

A lot of women still buy into a lot of sexist stuff and it won't go away until we quit.

While each individual may experience very different things over the course of a lifetime, in the aggregate, women still are at a disadvantage.

For every anecdotal, "I clean more than my wife", there are statistically thousands of women who do ALL or nearly all of the unpaid labor at home. They certainly do more than men do, on average. And they spend less time on leisure activities than men do, even when they have no children.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/10/another-gender-gap-men-spend-more-time-in-leisure-activities/

Now, I would expect progressive men to be more egalitarian, so the right-wing sexist assholes are no doubt giving the rest of you a bad rap. I've seen no such survey, so it's just a guess on my part.

I guess it just goes to show that just because some men consider them selves to be liberal, they can still be just as sexist as any right winger.

staffers less than men. Her defenders explained that the wage was the same but the difference was accounted for by time off (mothers). Now, if you want to say, women should be compensated for time off, too, that's a more important story and better reporting.

We both got a MS and PhD in engineering from the same school, under the same professor. I have 5 more years of work experience than he does, and we ended up working at the same company last year. We do the exact same job, but he gets paid 4% more than I do.

Why? Because he negotiated better when he was hired. I don't hate him for it, we have been very good friends for 8 years and counting.

Equal earnings for the same jobs when skills/experience are comparable is vital when women lose half a million dollars over a lifetime. This costs them precious economic independence - particularly as they age. Retired or elderly women are among the poorest seniors. This is one reason why. How much they spent while working (no matter "whose money" it was/who earned it) becomes irrelevant when they overall earned less for a lifetime and had to spend more on goods and services women use over a lifetime. Sure women can choose not to buy stuff marketed at women SOMETIMES. But that doesn't address items they have no choice about buying or not (feminine hygiene products) and it doesn't address wage disparities overall- no matter the anecdotal stories here and there from disbelieving males.

If your male peers are putting in hours more work, it's no surprise over the course of years that they end up making more money. They get the raises and the promotions. Their bosses and companies like them more and want to reward the hard work.


Men are overworking to make more money....women are not.

Women working at least a 40 hour week in a comparable job as a male deserve equal pay. Many of these are SALARIED jobs. Not hourly. Pay is the same in that case.

And if they're hourly then the hourly wage should be the same. If the guy gets more for working more hours then that's fine AFAIK.

"taking time off to raise YOUR kids" <--- WHOSE kids? Oh. They belong 100% to women when they're being raised. After working 40 hours at her job she gets to spend another 20-30 hours/week raising HER kids and cleaning HER house. Probably why HE has time to work 50-60 hours/week.

I don't think so.

Your argument: FAIL.

Perhaps a better idea would be to find a husband willing to share the household and childcare duties with you so you both can enjoy a career. Maybe that's a quality women need to start looking for and demanding in the men they date.

But if you marry a traditional husband making more money than you, guess who makes the career sacrifice when the baby comes?

And also, even if the career in question is salary...if the man is working 50 hours a week and the woman is working only 40 and refuses to work more....who gets the better raises? Who gets the promotion? It's not all about hourly wage.

See directly above whining about "men work more hours!"



Logistics don't support it.

They'll sea-lion this topic to death, they have for years. I just put two on ignore.

You would never know that this was a liberal website from some of the comments here.

Worrying about penis size, being macho, being a "bro"...no thank you.

Saying "I don't know" or "I'm not sure" makes their penis smaller, apparently. I say that because I've never EVER heard a guy say that in conversations involving these subjects. They must be very sure of themselves - nevermind what they actually understand about the subject or the issue or question at hand. I'm SURE they're not all that way....

You are so right.

And we need more men in teaching and nursing.

Men need to work fewer hours are take more vacations/family leave. Women need to take fewer vacations and work longer hours.