Join one of ERE's latest and most exciting groups!

Posted by Maureen Sharib
Lipstick. Join here.

******
The Book of Sourcers is ready! Get your list of 200+ sourcers now here.
NameSourcer blog.
Join the MagicMethod telephone names sourcing group over on RecruitingBlogs here.
Do something today you don’t think you can do. Lose phone fear here.

Comments

[Jim Durbi]

Maureen - I can't believe you buy that stuff about unequal pay. If it were true, companies would only hire women, as saving 25% on payroll costs would instantly make every company wildly profitable.

[Maureen Sharib]

Thirty years ago, women in the US earned about 60 percent of what men earned. They now earn about 81%.
Women with a high school education make $26,000 per year while men make about $10,000per year more.
With a university degree, women make an average of $42,000. Men make $57,000.
Equality between men and women has been reached in one way, but it's not a statistic that makes you want to break out the champagne:
The unemployment rate for women in the 1960s was about 30 percent higher than it was for men. Today, unemployment rates for men and women are equal.
Source:
http://tinyurl.com/5hyprl

[Recruiting Animal]

St Jimmy has an interesting argument. Maureen are you saying that companies would rather pay men more money for the same work they could get from women at a lower salary? If businesses thought that way would they be exporting jobs to India and China? Prejudice however is illogical so I won't simply dismiss what you are saying.

[Maureen Sharib]

I can't believe you guys are willing to disparage the fact that inequality - in pay between sexes - exists in the workplace. I'm not saying that companies intentionally do this but it certainly exists, has complicated roots and is endemic in other societies as well. And about exporting? Sure they'll export when they can save 50-80% plus vs maybe 10-15%! The bottom line, gentlemen, the bottom line is what it's all about.

[Jim Durbin]

Maureen,

If it were true, it would be horrible. But it's not factual.

Source: http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba392/

"When women behave in the workplace as men do, the wage gap between them is small. June O'Neill, former director of the Congressional Budget Office, found that among people ages 27 to 33 who have never had a child, women's earnings approach 98 percent of men's. Women who hold positions and have skills and experience similar to those of men face wage disparities of less than 10 percent, and many are within a couple of points. Claims of unequal pay almost always involve comparing apples and oranges."

It's all how you look at the numbers, and what choices you make.

[Maureen Sharib]

So what you're saying is women choose their own fates? There's some truth in this (many women don't want to hear this) but it's way more complicated (and many men don't want to hear THIS) than that Jim!

[Jennifer Bowen]

Jim - What that quote from the Congressional Budget Office is saying is that if women want to have a family then they give up a portion of their earning potential. I agree with that to some degree, but does the same hold true for when men choose to have a family? No!