Here's hoping

[pecunium]

Women are doing better than they were when I was in high school. Back then I recall a chart saying they made 67 cents for the same work a man got a dollar to do.

Seemed wrong to me then. Seemed more wrong that the chart wasn't really being honest, because that what what white women got. Black, women, hispanic women, and asian women got even less.

Today women are getting about 80 cents on the dollar; if they are white. With luck that won't be the case next year. There was a big deal about this at the Democratic Convention, and today the house passed a bill (again) which is likely to go to the senate (which this time is likely to pass it, requiring equal pay for equal work.

Down with Tyranny has details.

“In this economy, families are struggling to make ends meet. Not one of them deserves to be shortchanged, but because women still earn 78 cents for every dollar men earn, many unfortunately are. But this does not need to be. Today, by passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, we send a strong message that gender discrimination is unacceptable and women will have the tools they need to combat it. We are standing up for working women and their families. It is our moment to fight for economic freedom and eliminate the systemic discrimination faced by women workers. With this legislation, we begin the change, make history, and change lives.”
Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)

Comments

[lawgeekgurl.livejournal.com]

I was hired at my company about two months after a colleague, who is male. I know (and probably shouldn't have) exactly what the discrepancies in our salaries were - and he had about the same experience as I did. I was underpaid (grossly so, as it turns out) until last year's raise, which actually got me closer to where I should be given my job title and responsibilities. The thing that makes me mad (if I think about it, and I try not to) is that he's kept par with my raises, so he's always going to make more than me. It's maddening.

[kateyule.livejournal.com]

WEll, shit. Paint me ignorant; I thought we had this.

[aesmael.livejournal.com]

Indeed. I have always been puzzled by these discrepancies because I thought it must be against the law to pay differently for the same work or job description. But I was not motivated enough to investigate.

[slave2tehtink.livejournal.com]

Except that these things are so notoriously hard to prove, esp. when a lot of companies make you sign an NDA about your compensation. I strongly suspect that this is one more thing that isn't going to change until we actually get some deep-rooted change in the way society thinks.

I still say the civilian world is a damn sight more sexist than the Navy ever was. Dunno how it works in the Army world, but I've dealt with crap outside that would have gotten someone nailed to the wall in the Navy.

[jenny-gould.livejournal.com]

if its anything like Britain, the pay discrepancies here are caused by

A) a *lot* of women working in a very small subset of the job market. These being part-time, very low paid jobs like catering, cleaning and low-end admin jobs. They are the sorts of jobs you can work round child-friendly lifestyles, but even if you have no children they are often the jobs women do!

B) Extra hidden perks on top of the advertised salary that need to be demanded. Men do better on average at finding out about and negotiating for them.

[pyffe.livejournal.com]

But we also need to educate women on how to successfully negotiate. As a woman who mentors other young women who are starting out in business, I find they are ignorant about how to ask for what they want (in more than just business, too, but that's another story). I have a saying on the wall in my cube, "In this life we don't get what we want. We get what we negotiate."

Learning to effectively communicate what you want is something we're never taught. And it seems to me that some women are also taught (maybe not directly) not to speak up, to defer to higher ups, and to generally let others make decisions. We need to, as a society, work on that, too, if we want to equal out these kinds of things.

[elf]

(A) isn't relevant here; this is comparing wages for the same jobs, not the more general "compare what women make to what men make." That difference is a lot more than 20%.

(B) might be a factor, but might not; I'm not sure what statistics are used for these comparisons.

No, this is mostly just companies that hire two employees for the same jobs, one male, one female, and pay the man $10 and hour and the woman $8 an hour. Sometimes, there's a clause in the hiring contract that forbids discussing one's wages with anyone. And they can do this because there's no law against it. For a long time, the excuse was "the man probably has a family to support, and the woman is just going to leave when she gets married."

This excuse is no longer flying even in the most conservative groups in the US, and I'm happy to hear someone's finally addressing it again.

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

We should have had it, long ago, I think, but as far as I can figure out we/Congress just Debated/Talked About It, and Appointed Committees To Investigate The Situation. That is, of course, the usual response of any big organization to any vexing problem. Whether they will, this time, do a good job of repairing the fabric of the structure, or just slap a coat of paint on it, doesn't seem to be clear, but I'm not betting big money on the former. And if such discrimination is legally prohibited, it's still going to be up to the individual to prove that it's happening, which is difficult at best.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

In the Army (and I suspect in the Navy) a lot depends on command climate, but the nature of the beast is such that one can't get away with so much of this crap.

One, we know who has rank (and usually who has authority), and the pay is mandated by law. If it were me, I'd make NDA on compensation illegal.

[daedala.livejournal.com]

One of the biggest problems is that women don't negotiate.

It's not so much that the offers are that different, I don't think. It's that the men negotiate more, and the women usually don't try to. Like Poe's gold bug story, the slight difference in starting position becomes a big difference as things continue.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

It's hard to negotiate when you are forbidden from knowing the nature of the playing field.

I am bad at estimating my worth. A company makes me an offer and I decide how I feel about it. If I am not allowed to know what other offers have been made (and if discussing the final settlements is grounds for not only termination, but financial loss for breach of contract), I am not going to be able to figure out how much the company thinks the generic value of the work is worth.

Will this affect men? Maybe. It depends on whether the companies are using the substandard pay of women to subsidise the preferential treatment of men.

[silkiemom.livejournal.com]

Yes, men tend to be able to negotiate for better salaries for the same position than women. Part of this is the expected behaviour for men and women. Women are valued for being "nice", while men are valued for being "aggressive". A man who negotiates hard for his salary and benefits is a good thing. A woman who negotiates hard is "pushy" and is not seen as a team player.

[daedala.livejournal.com]

Oh -- just to be clear, I'm in no way suggesting it's fair not to pay women just because they aren't asking; just pointing out that it happens. We do get penalized for asking. I'm pretty sure I turned down one job that wouldn't increase the starting salary for me, but would have for a man.

[pyffe.livejournal.com]

Agreed. That's another thing I run up against with many people I've worked with. Them not knowing their worth in the workplace. I can think of 2 specific instances, both were women. One who was and is a collegue and the other who I personally hired. The first is now, with my 'coaching', making what she's worth (and recently stood her ground and got what she wanted) and the other who I had to tell was asking for nearly $20 less an hour than she should have been.

In my line of work, I can and do know what to ask for. But I have to do my homework to know. I know the ability to know this information can be limited in other jobs, but it isn't as much in my line of work.

I think it effects, not necessarily "women" or "men", but "people". Gender is a factor, but I'm not convinced its the cause. I'd like to see people taught how to effectively communicate and negotiate regardless of gender.

That said, are jobs where salaries are published, such as teachers, union members, etc, are the women there making less? That seems like it would be too easy to prove.

[pdlloyd.livejournal.com]

Well, I've tried negotiating. Mostly, I'm told it's a "take it, or leave it" proposition. Even when I've been able to negotiate, it's been hard to know whether I got everything I could, due to the requirement (which isn't just contractual, but also social) that employees refrain from discussing their salaries.

[urox.livejournal.com]

Ditto this. I've tried negotiation and I've found they're less likely to budge than when some of my other co-workers have done so.

[urox.livejournal.com]

Not only this (the keeping par with raises), but some companies have a ratings scale such that if you are rated for certain values, even if everyone at the company works their ass off, you aren't eligible for a raise, not even when the company has a "market adjustment" pay raise available. And then upper management only has X amount of dollars to give out to everyone. It comes down to asking and getting benefits/salary early and politics.

[pdlloyd.livejournal.com]

One trick that companies use (and I don't know this affects the sexes) is to ask prospective employees to state their desired salary, rather than to have a specific amount that they offer. I really hate that; especially as it never works in the employee's favor and many companies will refuse to deal with you if you don't want to play this little game. If you ask for too much, they're likely to just eliminate you from the pool, without further notice; if you ask for too little, they may say great and you never know if you could have gotten more.

I've also discovered that jobs in my field (which has been technical writing, although I'm trying to branch out) vary widely in the compensation offered. I've tried to find statistics, but it's hard to find accurate figures for my area. Even knowing the "typical" salary, though, rarely did me much actual good when it came to actually negotiating a salary. For instance, one of the most high-status employers here typically offers compensation at approximately two-thirds the rate that technical writers are supposed to be getting, according to the salary comparisons I've found. But, many writers will jump at the chance to work for them, because of the cache of having them on your resume when looking for future positions. And it's really future work that's a consideration here, because they only offer contract work and no longer offer permanent positions. Also, they've recently lowered what they offer by 10%. I've turned down jobs with them in the past, when job prospects were better, but if I were offered a job with them (or almost anyone) in the current market, I'd be there in a flash. :/

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

For instance, one of the most high-status employers here typically offers compensation at approximately two-thirds the rate that technical writers are supposed to be getting, according to the salary comparisons I've found. But, many writers will jump at the chance to work for them, because of the cache of having them on your resume when looking for future positions.

I am sure they count on it; esp. as you say it's always contract work. They will claim they are providing "value" for the ticky-box on the réumé, and so they shouldn't have to pay more. That and the excess of supply that ticky-box provides them.

[pdlloyd.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure they even bother to attempt to rationalize for it. Since they work through recruiters, they don't really have to do much. I have learned that there are differences within different divisions of the company, too. One will have a very firm commitment to a low price, while another will have more wiggle room. So, any time I'm working with the recruiters (or, at least, in past negotiations) I discussed this with the recruiters. I found that I can be more up front with recruiters, because they understand me when I say: X is the figure I'm used to getting and that I'd prefer, but I don't want to be eliminated, just because I made an offer that's outside of what they're willing to pay.

[sunfell.livejournal.com]

That is my problem- I don't know what my 'worth' is, and have no clue about how to estimate it. I have a huge skillset, an a quick learner and a damn good teacher. When my manager introduced me to the newly elected members in the House, he said that I 'had the patience of Job'. Is that a valuable job skill?

I suppose I am fortunate- I am in one of the few job fields where women make more than men at a certain point. Of course, the downside was that I never took a break to have kids- which increased my value severalfold. I don't make as much as my peers in the private sector, but I am not doing too badly. Still, I wish that compensation wasn't so hush-hush- in the military we all knew who made what, and who got screwed over (single people, of course).

[silkiemom.livejournal.com]

Looks like we agree on the negotiating part. :) And the difference in starting position really does perpetuate itself, since that starting salary is the basis for percentage increases, and also as a basis for negotiating in future job interviews.

But I don't know how we change the culture so that women don't get penalized for asking. :P

[starcat-jewel.livejournal.com]

Educating women about how to successfully negotiate is fine, but it's also orthogonal to the problem of differential pay. There's no reason not to fix the latter while working on the former.