The Wage Gap for Women

[Triana]

The Wage Gap for Women
By Debra Katz and Justine F. Andronici, Ms. Magazine
Posted on November 27, 2006, Printed on November 27, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/44769/

Imagine you're a woman interviewing for a job you really want. You get a call the next day with an offer, and immediately accept it. Later, though, you discover that a male counterpart earns significantly more than you. When pressed for an explanation, your boss tells you that the man demanded more when he negotiated his starting pay.

If you sue for wage discrimination under this scenario, your chances of success would, unfortunately, be slim. Current rulings in employment law have permitted employers to hide behind the "she-didn't-ask-for-more" and other so-called market-based excuses as legitimate reasons for paying women less than men for the same job or one of equivalent value.

Here's how the system has been working: Under the crucial federal antidiscrimination law -- Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 -- a woman must prove that an employer was motivated by intent to discriminate when deciding to pay her less than a male counterpart. Therefore, employers who merely take advantage of the fact that a woman is willing to work for less won't be held liable for pay discrimination.

In a slightly different vein, under the federal Equal Pay Act -- which requires only that an employee prove that an employer paid men and women differently even though they performed the same job, not an intent to discriminate -- the law lets employers escape liability if they can show that the pay differentials are caused by a "factor other than sex." To avoid legal liability, employers trot out market-based excuses: The woman asked for less money, did not seek or negotiate strongly for a raise, or came to the job from a position that paid less. These excuses have, for example, shielded universities that paid female coaches considerably less than male coaches, or compensated female faculty members in male-dominated disciplines less than their male colleagues.


MUCH MORE at link...

[benevolent dictator]

1. Good to know...

I'll need to keep this in mind for if I ever graduate, since the field I'm going into is only 1-2% women...

[Nobody]

2. Also keep in mind

that companies one and all forbid discussing what you make with your co-workers.

At one company, a husband and wife in the same department were making vastly different amounts. He made about 20k per year more than she was. I can't think of anything that would justify that in a fair world.

They were in the same department and doing the same job. I can't imagine differences in seniority would matter to the tune of $20,000. I don't know how much experience each had, so that's a variable.

They do it because they can get away with it.

[Triana]

3. "They do it because they can get away with it"

Exactly. Until the Feds step in and put in STRICT laws against it, it'll keep happening. However, such laws would be considered 'anti-business'.

Huh.