[ad_1]
This week, women's rights activists and feminist organizations such as the American Association of University Women will be promoting "Equal Pay Day" on Tuesday, April 2nd. This is an update of my article "Bigfoot" published a year ago to help thwart some mythology statistics that is recycled each year in early April about "the pay gap between equality ". The annual event known as Equal Pay Day brings awareness of the totally fictitious comparison of the comparison of median incomes between men and women. This year, Equal Pay Day will focus on the unadjusted difference in the median annual earnings of women and men working full-time in 2018 (most recent data available). nothing relevant is controlled for this would help to explain that the gross income differences of 20% like hours worked, marital status, number of children, education, occupation, the number of children. years of income continued Uninterrupted work experience, working conditions, safety at work, flexibility of the workplace, family-friendly workplaces, work safety and time spent traveling.
To begin, let us acknowledge that the general public, and more specifically women, progressives and democrats, is widely accepted, the false assertion that women are paid "77 cents a dollar for do the same job as men"- as President Obama said in 2012, even though it is a complete myth easily falsifiable and classified in fact"Especially fake"From Politifact. Hillary Clinton reformulated the false claim for the campaign by stating in late 2015 that "on average, women have to work two hours more per day to earn the same salary as their male counterparts."
In 2015, Linda Hallman, who was then Executive Director of the American Association of University Women (AAUW), sent a mass email on Equal Pay Day, falsely claiming "Think about it: Women need to work nearly four months longer than men to earn the same pay if they do the same job. In addition, we must reserve a day each year to attract the attention of the nation. "
The National Committee on Pay Equity (NCPE) says that with women earning only about 80 cents for every dollar earned by men, the average American worker will have to continue working until Tuesday, April 2 – Day equal pay – to earn the same salary. income than his male counterpart earned last year. A Tuesday is always selected for Equal Pay Day, because that day would represent every work week all year long, women have to work to earn what their male colleagues have earned the week before.
Despite the widespread acceptance of the large number of claims "77/80 cents per dollar for the same work" described above, it is rare that specific evidence is presented showing that a specific organization has violated the law federal government by paying women 20% or more. more less than men to do the same job. Politicians like Obama and Clinton, and gender equality organizations, such as the NCPE and AAUW, insinuate that the country's businesses and organizations blatantly and illegally violate the law of 1963 on equal pay by paying women 77/80 cents per dollar the same work as men, and these deliberate, flagrant and ongoing violations go unnoticed. If gender wage disparities are ubiquitous, in violation of federal law, why are the Ministry of Justice, the Civil Rights Bureau or the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission not conducting long investigations? And why is there not a cottage industry made up of law firms specializing in the representation of women victims of supposedly ubiquitous discrimination and television advertising, when there are hundreds of law firms? lawyers proposing on television mesothelioma victims exposed to asbestos at work in previous decades?
Where do we find these companies that apparently have an illegal double wage policy: a salary scale for men and another one for women, with a salary 20/23% lower than that of their male colleagues for the same work? What specific organizations actually pay women 20/23% less than men and expose them to lawsuits, fines and penalties? Obama, Clinton, NCPE or AAUW never answer these questions.
Well, let's now look at some examples of where it's pretty clear that we could DO NOT find the kind of blatant discrimination in gender-based pay that would make women earn "77 cents a dollar for the same job as men". Here are some examples:
- Women-owned businesses. According to this report, there are more than 12.3 million women-led businesses in the United States, which employ nearly 9.2 million workers, accounting for over 7% of all jobs in the sector. private. It seems highly unlikely that women will engage in a highly illegal (and unethical) activity of paying their female employees 20% less than their male counterparts. If the implication of "80 cents on the dollar" is that employers are the cause of women, we will not accuse women of being the attackers other women, would we do it? Do not seem too likely.
- Women CEOs. According to the BLS, more than 400,000 women held the position of "general manager" of their organization last year. Would these women CEOs have any tolerance for a policy of illegal compensation of the company that pays its employees 20% less than their male colleagues for the same work? Probably not.
- Members of the Union. In 2018, 14.7 million salaried workers were represented by trade unions. Unions usually negotiate seniority-based and not sex-based compensation contracts, and it would be almost impossible for them to violate federal laws by negotiating contracts with employers to pay women 20/23% less than men. Same position with the same seniority.
- Workers paid on commission. Last year, nearly 1.4 million real estate agents in the United States were paid commission-based, of which over 56% were women. Nationally, there were 619,000 insurance sales agents in 2018 and more than half (51.4%) of them are women. Since the remuneration of these sales agents is mainly determined by a commission and these commissions are based on a percentage of the sales volume of the agents, there does not seem to be much support with regard to the pay gaps. 20/23% between men and women for these commissions. occupations For example, when did you ever hear that "women real estate agents or insurance agents receive 80 cents per dollar for selling the same amount of real estate or insurance as their male colleagues"? Just what I thought – never.
- Government employees. There are 22.5 million Americans working for the government at federal (2.8 million), state (5.2 million) and local (14.5 million) levels. Illegal discrimination by paying a government employee 20% less than a man for the same government job? Not at all likely. Government salaries are strictly determined by job classification, experience and seniority and are clearly not adjusted by gender.
- Waiters and waitresses. There are more than 2 million waiters and waitresses in America, and 70% are women. Since their pay is mainly based on tips, I do not think it's possible to say that "waitresses are paid on average 20% less than waiters for the same job, working the same number of hours and serving the same number of people. customers who generated the same turnover. Unless, of course, clients discriminate against women and give female waiters 20% less tips than they leave for male waiters? Not likely.
- Public School Teachers and University Professors. There are nearly 5 million teachers at primary and secondary levels (mainly in public schools) and 1.42 million teachers at university (BLS data here). There are also nearly one million education administrators and over two – thirds (67%) of these positions are held by women. Of course, some of these educators could also be represented in the categories "Union Members" and "Government Employees" above, but when did you ever hear a primary school teacher or a school teacher? university professor claiming that she was receiving 20% less than their male colleagues of equal qualification? Never. Most of these salary data are public, as for faculty and staff employed by the University of Michigan (all three campuses). If female faculty members or staff at the University of Michigan are paid 20% (or another percentage) less than their male counterparts, it should be fairly easy to prove it. A complaint of gender-based discrimination in Michigan can easily be filed here on the EEOC's Detroit Office website.
- Human Resources Professionals. There are 313,000 human resources managers in the United States and nearly 78% of these positions are held by women. Would it even be possible for hundreds of thousands of women human resources managers to engage in illegal activities and violate federal law by paying other women in their organizations 20/23% less than men for same position with the same qualifications? Not likely.
- Many large companies have women as senior managers in human resources. For example, Mellisa Kremer, Executive Vice President and Director of Human Resources, has the highest human resource position at Target. Five of Target's top 12 leaders are women. Any possibility that Target violates the Equal Pay Act, exposing its organization to possible lawsuits, penalties and fines by compensating target employees of 20/23% or even 5% less than employees. men for the same job? Nope. Similarly, Walmart's two main human resources managers are women. Any possibility that these women leaders of human resources tolerate illegal and unethical systematic wage discrimination that would result in Walmart paying women 20% less than men and exposes the organization to prosecution and investigations by the Bureau of Civil Rights and the EEOC? Probably not.
Of course, the list above is not exhaustive and does not completely cover all industries, all occupations, but it should call into question the fact that women rarely receive 20 or 23% less men to do the same work – in all sectors and occupations, even in women-owned or women-owned enterprises, or where the human resources department is headed by a woman – we must, unfortunately, 'reserve' one day every year to attract the country's attention widespread and widespread sex discrimination. "
Where are the organizations that have illegal double pay schedules that regularly compensate women for 20% less than men for the same job with the same qualifications? In reality, these organizations are as rare as an observation of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster. And yet, the "myth of the pay gap" continues to recycle and be regularly repackaged by politicians such as President Obama and Hillary Clinton – for obvious political purposes. The fact that the myth is clearly unsupported by any real evidence does not seem to interest most women, or almost all Democrats.
Bottom line: If there are indeed employers who illegally pay women 20% less than men for the same job, these companies must be laid bare, made public and prosecuted. Just as if the Loch Ness monster and the Bigfoot actually existed, they should be exposed and publicized with video footage. But just as the elusive evidence of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster should prompt us to question their existence, the elusive nature of any widespread evidence of "77 cents on the dollar to do the same job as men" should also lead us to question the fact that myth of the pay gap between men and women.
The myth of the wage gap between 20 and 23% to do exactly the same job is an "orange-to-apple" statistical fraud that continues to be recycled and promoted by politicians, the NCPE and AAUW, as it apparently brings in a lot of votes and financial support. And this will continue to pay off as long as average Americans, especially women, buy the statistical snake oil that is paid to them 20/23% less than men on average to do the same job. With the myths of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster, the 20/23% wage gap claim is a myth that will not die, no matter, or perhaps because of meager evidence.
Perversely perhaps, perhaps the false narrative "77 cents for a dollar" is actually kept alive by the complete lack of evidence that there are employers who actually pay women 23% of less than men for the same job. After all, it is best to keep these mythic violations very vague, ambiguous and undocumented in order to keep the myth alive, like very few Bigfoot observations. If the false myth of widespread wage differentials between men and women in the economy as a whole were ever exposed to evidence and truth, it would disappear and disappear, and would no longer be a popular topic to generate support political and women's votes. So maybe it's just the distant hope that one day there may be widespread evidence that an organization pays women 20% less than men doing the same job, or that it could day to see Bigfoot, who maintains these myths.
Addendum: As "Give Me Freedom" pointed out in the comments on my article on Bigfoot two years ago, it's even worse than I suggest because the myth of "77 cents on the dollar" is as follows: average the pay gap between men and women and it is clear that many women would even receive less than "77 cents per dollar" for an average of 77 cents. Here is more of GMF:
So where do women earn 70, 60 or 50 cents a dollar to do the same job as men, when the average is 77 cents? If as many women as men earn the same or almost the same salary, and the average is 77 cents per dollar, there must be a lot of women earning a lot less than 77 cents a day. the dollar to do the same job as a man. I think we would see and help these women first because their discrimination is even worse than average. Just as the "bigger" Bigfoots would be easier to spot, those women who earn even less than 77 cents per dollar doing the same job as men would stand out more and be more likely to be portrayed as examples of discriminatory remuneration. practices.
Venn Bonus Diagram Below (ht / "Not sure" in the comments section of last year):
[ad_2]
Source link