Editorial in Green Bay Paper Re: Wage disparity.

[TheMightyFavog]

http://greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070322/GPG06/703220561/1269/GPGopinion

Sunday's brief article regarding the March on Madison concerning the disparity between male and female earnings has left me with some questions.

Not to be disingenuous, but what were the marchers hoping to accomplish? The perceived problem is that women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns, but what is the assumed cause? More importantly, what is the hoped-for legislative response?

(snip)

I believe the underlying cause is cultural, not legal. Society continues to push women into jobs with less stress, fewer hours, less travel and more flexibility.

More often than not, women choose dental hygienist over dentist, nurse over doctor, and schoolteacher over business.

Yes, this guy is from my neck of the woods. It just goes to show you the attitudes up there.

[rodeodance]

1. GB is part and parcel of the Red Fox corridor.

[TheMightyFavog]

2. Don't forget that district elected Steve Kagen to Congress

Actually, this guy's north of the Fox Corridor. From Marinette County, a place that makes the Fox Corridor look like San Fransisco. Lots of gun owners and hunters up there who have either swallowed the NRA's "gun-grabbing democrats" paranoia, and people who vote with their Bibles instead of their brains up there.

[LiberalFighter]

3. You need to write a rebuttal so that A) Educate them B) Ridicule him

Mainly rebut that earnings are compared apples to apples not apples to oranges.

A female attorney in a small town will not be compared to a male attorney in a major town in wages.
Rather with a male attorney in other small towns.

A female dental hygienist will not be compared to a male dentist in wages.
Rather with a male dental hygienist or other similar occupation.

A female assembly worker will not be compared to a male management employee in the same factory.
Rather with a male assembly worker in the same type of industry.

Even a female typist/secretary would not be compared with a administrative assistant also doing typing related duties mainly because the AA has more duties.

Would they want their female police officers and firefighters not doing as good a job because they were paid less then their fellow workers?

[Solo_in_MD]

4. They may well be right, its choice not discrimination, certainly for those under 30

60% of starting undergraduates are women these days. However, they are mostly liberal arts majors. Liberal arts majors get around $32K upon graduation (assuming they don't end up at a McJob), and will tend to top out around $60K. Technical majors, which are mostly male, get around $50K and will go to $100K fairly rapidly. These numbers are well known. Its a choice that undergraduates are knowing making.

Then there is the opt out generation, the well educated women who decide to stay home, or work reduced hours to be with their children. Linda Hirshman writes about them and is furious about it. She feels they are abdicating their responsibility to society etc. when the Ivy League graduates some with professional degrees choose to stay home, not go on partner track etc. Hirshman's spittle aside, even she admits that this is quite real. Top wage earning women with similar partners are choosing to opt out and stay home or work part time. Its quite real, and seriously impacts "the numbers". She tries to postulate it is a societal imprint, but can not escape that it is clearly individuals that are choosing.

I have never seen or worked for an employer that has a differential pay scale for women. Whether its building cleaning, nursing, sales or teaching, security, etc, pay scales are gender neutral. To do anything else would be foolish and illegal.

Yes there are pay disparities, but you need to look at why and when. To claim its discrimination without something other than salary percentage is misleading.