Apple, Facebook, IBM, and Microsoft Sign White House Pledge For Equal Pay (fortune.com) 294
In honor of Women's Equality Day, an anonymous reader shares with us a festive report from Fortune: More than two months after the White House first announced its Equal Pay Pledge for the private sector, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft and other major industry players have signed on. By taking the pledge, which was first introduced at the United State of Women Summit in June of this year, companies promise to help close the national gender pay gap, conduct annual, company-wide pay analyses, and review hiring and promotion practices. The new signees were announced in a White House statement on Friday -- which also happens to be Women's Equality Day, the anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment, which gave women the right to vote. Apple, which announced earlier this year that it has no pay gap, released a statement promising to dig even deeper into compensation. "We're now analyzing the salaries, bonuses, and annual stock grants of all our employees worldwide. If a gap exists, we'll address it," the company said in a statement. Twenty-nine companies signed the pledge on Friday, bringing the total number of signatories to 57. The pledge is part of a $50-million, White House-led initiative to expand opportunities for and improve the lives of women and girls. The consortium members issued a statement via Whitehouse.gov's press release: "The Employers for Pay Equity consortium is comprised of companies that understand the importance of diversity and inclusion, including ensuring that all individuals are compensated equitably for equal work and experience and have an equal opportunity to contribute and advance in the workplace. We are committed to collaborating to eliminate the national pay and leadership gaps for women and ethic minorities. Toward that end, we have come together to share best practices in compensation, hiring, promotion, and career development as well as develop strategies to support other companies' efforts in this regard. By doing so, we believe we can have a positive effect on our workforces that, in turn, makes our companies stronger and delivers positive economic impact." The consortium members include: Accenture, Airbnb, BCG, Care.com, CEB, Cisco, Deloitte, Dow, Expedia, EY, Glassdoor, GoDaddy, Jet.com, L'Oreal USA, Mercer, PepsiCo, Pinterest, Rebecca Minkoff, Salesforce, Spotify, Staples, Stella McCartney, and Visa.
Cool (Score:5, Interesting)
Can they work equal time?
Cause in my experience there's a lot more "oh my children" time given and no "Hey I am a single white male" time compensated.
Re:Cool (Score:5, Interesting)
Can they work equal time?
Cause in my experience there's a lot more "oh my children" time given and no "Hey I am a single white male" time compensated.
Hopefully, the work itself will have some impact on compensation. I was the highest paid person in my department by far. That's because I would put in the work needed to get the job done. Trying to get a female co-worker to put in anything over 40 hours was almost impossible. The reasons it was impossible was that "I have to cook dinner for my husband/pick up the kids at day care/I have a golf match/group therapy/I'm in a car pool/I have a headache. The same for most field trips.
To the point where in over 30 years, I recall one time a female co-worker worked overtime. She even cried about it.
After 5 was a sausagefest, as they say. So I'd be interested in seeing some equality in that area as well.
And that's a big issue, because although I'm retired now, if my co-workers who couldn't be bothered to put in any extra when needed were paid the same as me, I'd either need a promotion, or would also have to cook dinner for my wife.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh well. It's been nice, Slashdot. But I think we're done.
Re: (Score:2)
About half of men in the workforce have children.
Re:You forget that (Score:5, Informative)
Enough ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You forget that (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but you must be looking at different stats:
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17%
Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
The only articles I can find that say otherwise are ALL pointing to the same HuffPo article (not even a scholarly backed piece).
The "majority" of parents does indeed reach an agreement out of court, a little over 50% (Macooby & Mnookin) reaches a so-called uncontested agreement, that means at least 49% is contested. In SJW-world this would mean any contested cases should automatically go to the father right? Equality in numbers and all.
In a study of 705 cases, an uncontested request for maternal physical custody was made in 500 cases. The outcome matched the request for maternal custody in nearly 90% of such cases. In contrast, paternal physical custody was awarded in only 75% of the 47 cases in which there was an uncontested request for sole paternal physical custody. - So EVEN in uncontested cases (the mother agrees), the courts will 25% of the time override the parents' wishes and still grant the mother custody.
There are some 40,000 disputed custody cases every year which are decided by family court judges. These judges will listen to recommendations from court welfare officers who visit the family and write 35,000 reports every year. The welfare officers work in the probation service which deals with mostly male criminals, this makes it difficult to see fathers in a positive light. The result is that family courts award mothers sole custody in 71% of cases and fathers sole custody in 7% of all cases, joint custody is awarded in the remaining 21% of cases. Many fathers report giving up an expensive custody fight for their children after advice from lawyers who say they can't win. It is very common for mothers during custody battles to receive state funded legal aid. A custody battle is therefore a very unequal war of attrition. Many fathers report that efforts to have contact with their children are blocked by mothers, and the courts will not enforce the right of children to have contact with their fathers.
Re: (Score:2)
You are looking at the wrong stats to support the claim, i.e. that men generally do worse in legal custody battles. It's not the percentage of time that the child lives with the father that matters, it's the percentage of time when both parents want custody and the father doesn't get it that matters. Otherwise you are including all the fathers who didn't want their children to live with them for any number of reasons.
Here's a page summarising the stats from your source, Macooby & Mnookin, and others: ht [archive.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17%
Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
Could you maybe provide a citation when you quote numbers like this? Because your figures suspiciously add up to 100% here, even though you're claiming success rates for two different groups. Are you sure you don't just mean something like, "In contested custody cases, 17% go to the father and 83% go to the mother"? Because those numbers roughly mirror the the split between custodial parents overall (roughly 80-85% mothers, 15-20% fathers. which has been roughly the same over the past 25 years at least).
Re:You forget that (Score:5, Interesting)
"Which is not to say I'm unsympathetic, but the issue isn't the disparity, it's the things that drive people to suicide."
That's saying that women are incompetent at suicide. It's not like it's a big secret that pills and cutting aren't very likely to actually kill you and getting information of easily accessible methods that will actually get the job done isn't more than a search away (automotive assisted decapitation ftw!). Being capable of researching options isn't a gendered thing (or we should re-evaluate a lot of things).
I suspect the reality is that the disparity is largely based on the rational projections of future life chances. There's a large difference in the likely development of a life for those who aren't completely capable of dealing with it for men and women. Women make an ultimately rational choice to keep chances high to get help, because they have a significant chance of actually getting help, and even women who can never support themselves will often be able to life a somewhat decent life, get support from parents, attract a mate, etc. While men... well, a failed suicide attempt isn't exactly CV improving material.
So, whether a fully conscious choice or not, the disparity is sociologically and probably biologically rational. Men have better reasons to be serious about it if they decide to check out.
And I really don't see any tendencies that it will change. Rather, I think our care for women is biologically hardwired, and the way society is progressing for the moment, being unsympathetic to men is more popular than ever. I mean, fuck, look at something like BLM; even if, in reality, the black men are mainly getting shot due to being male rather than being black, would you try launching a 'mens lives matter' movement? I think not.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you have to understand what the mental state of people contemplating suicide is like. They tend not to research it too heavily, in fact often it's a hasty decision. Men tend to have higher gun ownership and access to guns too. I was going to suggest that one way to help men would be more gun control, but that's another powder keg that will only distract people. There are other gendered issues too, like women wanting to not mutilate their corpses by jumping or shooting themselves, which is quite comm
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I understand it very well, and was active in a rare non-judgemental forum for a long time. The actual act itself is often triggered due to short term events, but people contemplating suicide have often lived with depression a long time, and among them, interest in methods is so high that most 'help' forums will outright ban any discussion of suicide or methods and/or threaten to call police on anyone discussing it. Most will have had suicidal thoughts for months or years, and looking at how to do it is
Re: (Score:3)
Higher suicide rate is actually more like a higher success at suicide rate.
Check your privilege, you tool of the patriachy! Your insinuation of the tired old accusation that men are more competent than women is offensive!. Just kidding, but if we are going to go there, I'm going to make fun of it.
When is this inequity iniquity going to end? We must tirelessly work until women are as successful as men in offing themselves. Close the suicide gap!
Re: (Score:2)
It definitively sucks to be judged by a collective based on your race and gender, rather than your individual merits and hardships.
Re: (Score:3)
It definitively sucks to be judged by a collective based on your race and gender, rather than your individual merits and hardships.
Bigotry does not know limits based on gender. A female who decides all men are rapists is no different in principle that a Klan member who believes all blacks are inferior. All men have a rape switch http://jezebel.com/5279283/is-... [jezebel.com]
That's pretty offensive. But watch the feedback telling us that its somehow different.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep.
I have a suspicious that most of those movements are normally quite sane and do asks for reasonable things, but from time to time there is this huge mass of simpletons that pick a movement and completely wreck it with what we could call "intellectual laziness".
They don't inform themselves of the subject, try to simplify it with stupid ideas like collectivism and then flood the thing with awful ideas until its dead.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree there is no difference morally, but there is a big difference societally. A female who decides all men are rapists gets rewarded with Title IX kangaroo courts in universities where the man's right to trial by jury is denied.
By the way, in the citadels of learning where much of the misandry is enabled, there are cracks in the foundations. The University of Chicago sent a letter to all incoming students that included in part:
"Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called 'trigger warnings,' we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual 'safe spaces' where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at adds w
Ok (Score:5, Insightful)
Fine, as long as it works both ways. There are two women on my team who earn more than me with less qualifications and are on my team solely because they are women. Diversity! I should expect a raise right?
Re:Ok (Score:4, Insightful)
If you really think you're underpaid compared to your co-workers, then yes, you should ask for a raise (not simply "expect" one). Whether they are women or not, the "correct" answer doesn't change.
However, you've probably never asked because you're afraid that the answer will be that they are actually more qualified and/or better at their jobs than you are.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually the best thing you can do is start shopping your resume around and stop being discreet about it once you have a couple of offers.
Why the fuck should you do a favor to people that slighted you ? They thought it was a game well teach em to play.
Re: (Score:2)
So on the one hand, men earn more because they are better negotiators. On the other, the advice to men is to simply leave rather than try to negotiate.
This is why the situation is so screwed up, unfair not just to women but pretty much everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
1 line so wrong. Your comment relates to nothing anyone said, and ignores the best way to negotiate is to have multiple bidders.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm in this exact same situation and no, the female developer is not more qualified or better at her job. The response was "you need to be more sensitive to current climate".
I am now looking for a new job after being informed that they're looking to expand their diversity efforts. I've already had one hiring manager casually tell me that my 'optics' put me at a disadvantage in his hiring criteria. (Optics meaning that I'm 'fucking a while male!!!')
Take all of your SJW horseshit and cram it right where th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The pay gap is a function of averaging part-time women, and women who started their career late or took several years off (and hence didn't accrue as much experience or raises in their age group) with men who have not done these things.
On average, men have more full-time positions, and more experience at their positions, than women (on AVERAGE). When you account for those differences and compare apples-to-apples, women are already being paid more.
Now, they are going to get paid EVEN MORE to overcompensate
Re: (Score:2)
But yeah, stats lie, and more and more I find it hard to support the left because of things like this.
Re: (Score:2)
There are two women on my team who earn more than me with less qualifications
Yes, but do you make a good coffee?
--
This is a joke, JOKE.
Re: (Score:2)
Start a Equal Opportunity lawsuit, you should win.
If you are so sure (Score:5, Insightful)
What stops you from giving up your job so that the oppressed can work? Why does the progressive left always require other people to suffer to make up for suffering their policies have caused? I'll bet if your livelihood was threatened to support the narrative you would change your tune real quick. Strange how that works Comrade.
Re: If you are so sure (Score:2)
I think that what he's saying is that if you're a male and you really think we need more pay equality then go give half of your paycheck to one of your female co-workers to help balance things out.
Re:If you are so sure (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm curious. Why does it make you "suffer" because someone else gets paid as much as you do?
How does equal pay make you suffer?
Imagine me making a pro free market statement - so hold on to your hats!!!
In my situation I was very well paid - over 3 times what most of the people in my department of the same position.
But there was a reason for this. I worked outside my job definition as needed, I participated in research and coauthored papers, I interfaced effectively with all levels from the janitors to visiting dignitaries. I'd travel and work offsite, and spend as much time needed to get the job done. It was a very fluid situation, so you couldn't just throw more people at it - you needed that sort of dedication. And heaven help HR if they tried to make a job description.
So now we have to make an argument for a new person coming in being compensated the same as me. Or if the new person is female and doesn't want to work more than 40 hours a week. THe only female I know that regularly did that is my wife, an alpha chick of the "we are equal" variety, and I've worked with many.
Should this new person get the same pay as me? All of the typical suit's arguments asitde, that could be done. They could triple their wages.
But now there is me. My contribution was indeed worth more than theirs. I knew that, the people I worked for knew that. I would exercise my free market value and leave for higher pay somewhere else if the noob who wouldn't work more than 40 hours a week or work as hard or in as many areas with an expanded skillset. Or just work at the same level as they did.
On the other hand, there is no reason that a female doing the same thing shouldn't be compensated as much.
So they paid me more.
I do not know all of the details of this equal pay business, so I could be talking out of my ass - wouldn't be the first time. But its not remotely cut and dried. Let's hope it doesn't become a least common denominator situation.
Re: (Score:2)
That's all good, but it still doesn't answer the question of how you suffer if someone else doing the same job makes as much as you.
Re: (Score:2)
Good to see that sexual discrimination is alive and well.
Re: Ok (Score:5, Insightful)
You are getting dangerously close to 'Sins of the fathers' territory with that logic.
The solution to inequality is not an equal amount of inequality to the other side.
And the other end of the deal? (Score:4, Interesting)
So, did women pledge to work as hard as men do? Did they pledge to take as many overtime hours? Did they pledge to pursue the same risky and physically demanding careers, such as construction or mining?
Re: (Score:2)
I have never understood this argument, and I hear it a lot (never from women, btw).
Let's take a job that has some inherent danger, like lion-taming. It's also highly exclusive, there are only 2000 lion-tamers in the world, and they all happen to be men. There's no gender bias among ring-masters, women simply "don't like to tame lions", even though the average salary is around $100,000. So, what is the gender pay-gap among lion-tamers? Is it 100%, since "all" the women lion-tamers are earning an average of $
Re:And the other end of the deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that the often reported "pay-gap" doesn't control for qualifications, workload, or responsibility, right?
The pay-gap exists because men and women make different choices, and these choices have consequences even when everyone is paid identically based on qualifications, workload and responsibility.
Now, if you really want to talk about equal pay, hows about union shops where seniority drives pay, rather than qualifications, workload and responsibility. Two people, both working the same job, both producing the same results, and one gets paid more simply because they have been there longer. Now that's a sticky wicket.
Re: (Score:3)
This myth about it being a choice needs to die.
It's not a choice to be the only gender capable of carrying and breastfeeding children.
It's not a choice to be told from birth that engineering isn't for girls.
It's not a choice to be paid less because your boss rates masculinity highly when being asked for a raise.
It's not a choice to have to take all the parental leave because the pay is lower for men.
Re:And the other end of the deal? (Score:4, Insightful)
It is a choice to have children and the full consequences of doing so aren't a secret.
It is a choice to listen to people who try to tell you what you can and cannot do in your own future.
It is a choice to ask for a lower pay raise when you ask for a raise, as it is a choice to not seek a new job if your company doesn't appreciate you.
The last statement doesn't make any sense without more context.
Re:And the other end of the deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
But, the second a woman complains that she is unfairly paid less than them, these developers suddenly develop massive cases of amnesia and insist that their companies are true meritocracies where talent is universally recognized and rewarded, so obviously the accusations of discrimination against women are unwarranted.
Re:And the other end of the deal? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's only a meritocracy if the merit it recognizes is yours.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure all the female miners who work for Facebook have taken that pledge.
Re: (Score:2)
Screw you.
There is nothing inherent about women that would make them not work as hard as men. That's nonsense.
Professional sports would probably disagree with you on that.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Whoa there. Do you believe that the gold medal winning women olympic gymnasts didn't work as hard to achieve their accomplishments as their male counterparts? Did you see what they did?
Do you realize that the US women took home more medals in this olympics than the men?
And in regard to professional athletics, do you really believe - honestly - that the top male tennis players in the US had to work harder than the women players? The leading US w
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
In profession tennis tournaments, men play best of 5 sets while the women only play best of 3 sets, so yes, male tennis players absolutely have to work harder. The women are also paid the same amount despite having to play fewer sets.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually giving men 5 sets makes it easier for the favorites, and limits the number of upsets that can happen. [fivethirtyeight.com]
Also the reason that they reduced the Grand Slam tournaments from 5 to 3 is because women's matches last much longer than men's. So if we're talking on a time basis, women should be paid more even though they play less sets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Ask yourself for a moment why there are separate men's and women's events in the olympics.
For extra credit, calculate what medals the women would've won if they were required to compete against the men.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well done, you completely missed the point. The question was about how much effort men and women put in to their careers. Clearly in some sports men have an inherent advantage, but not in other jobs. Being physically larger and stronger won't help you write code or precision engineer a new widget.
There is no evidence that women are lazy or less motivated or less able to put in effort.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can get more viewers to watch Women's Sport, you will have teams (or individuals, eg Boxing) sharing in the higher revenue, and the pay gap will close.
This is trivially easy to prove, if you go back prior to the 1970's when TV contracts for men's sports began a huge climb. In the 1960's men's professional sports in different leagues were paid based on attendance and in some cases local TV contracts (big market teams such as those found in New York or
Re: (Score:3)
Similarly, Canada's Women's Olympic / National Hockey Team practice against of Canadian Amateur Boys from the 14~16 year old leagues. They are basically equivalent in win/loss records.
The Canadian Women's team and the US Women's National Hockey Team are the only truly competitive squads, every other Nation's teams are significantly outclassed by those two (eg it's common for o
Re: (Score:2)
I have no doubt that the top ranked women's football teams would struggle against much lower ranked men's teams too. But so what?
Men's football is crap. Too predictable, too much cheating, the outcome largely determined by money, and the matches just aren't very good for the most part. Women's world cup football is great, really fluid and exciting.
With most team sports, it's the amount of entertainment that matters, or at least should.
Re: (Score:2)
So, if a manager decides to hire a man because he thinks that the young woman might want to take maternity leave one day and the guy won't, it adds to the pay gap.
That's where your argument falls apart. The woman ends up in a lower paid job, but gets the same pay as men in that job. Equal pay for equal work, but she was unfairly denied the better job.
And that explains why companies don't hire women for less. Aside from it being illegal in many places, that's just not good the bias works.
Re: And the other end of the deal? (Score:5, Insightful)
I suppose it depends on how you measure "hard".
If you mean "hard" as in "put in my own personal maximum effort", you've got a point. A five year old girl can "work as hard" as a 35 year old man, if they're both trying their best. Hell, a five year old girl can work even *harder* than a 35 year old man, if he's just slacking.
If you mean "hard" as in "actually performed an objectively measurable feat of strength", then, yes, there are some inherent sexual differences, and you can clearly see this in the over-representation of men in objectively hard, dangerous, physical jobs. Your "hard working" five year old girl might be putting 100% maximum effort to lift that 10 pound bag, and the "slacking" 35 year old man might only be putting in 10% effort moving around a 40 pound bag, but the 35 year old man is doing harder work.
I only point this out because GP didn't use the word "effort", which you seem to have interpreted into their comment.
In my experience, there is a significant difference in productivity for men and women, across quite a number of professions. Claiming that there is no difference in the productivity is quite misandrinistic. It's also false.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Come on, man. What was the last time you think someone reading Slashdot "actually performed an objectively measurable feat of strength"?
This story is about Apple, Facebook, IBM and Microsoft. How often do you think the jobs we're talking about require "feats of strength"?
Re: (Score:3)
This story is about Apple, Facebook, IBM and Microsoft. How often do you think the jobs we're talking about require "feats of strength"?
Dunno about feats of strength; but I bet there've been plenty airing of grievances.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't get a raise until you can pin me!
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's definitely a harassment suit waiting to happen...
Re: (Score:2)
The same is true for intellectual work. An eight year old can work quite hard to solve a math problem, the same math problem that a 35 year old will solve without making much of an effort.
As for the difference between men and women, we generally say that women are better "multitaskers" than men. This is actually not true, here's one of several studies [dailymail.co.uk] showing men are actually better multitaskers, but this myth that women are better multitaskers comes from the fact that men are also better at focusing (worki
How about the H1-B Equal Pay Pledge? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I didn't think so.
There is no gender gap it's b.s. (Score:2)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ka... [forbes.com]
http://www.washingtonexaminer.... [washingtonexaminer.com]
http://fortune.com/2016/04/12/... [fortune.com]
But hey, you need to keep the plebes riled up.
Re: (Score:2)
You may not have notice when you were copy-pasting those links, the ONE STORY that was actually about the pay gap and had any data was about worldwide pay in developed nations. Women in most European countries have been making the same as men for decades. Hell, even in little countries like Serbia, there's been pay equity for over half a century. The other two stories were op-ed pieces by people who presented evidence, only feelings.
If you look up at the headline of this story, you will notice that it's
Re:There is no gender gap it's b.s. (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/th... [wsj.com]
Yawn
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You sound tired. When you get some rest, have another look and see that the article you cited was an op-ed. Opinion. Commentary.
When they WSJ reports the news, there's a wage gap. When they give their feels, there isn't. Do you see a pattern here?
Re: (Score:2)
You sound tired. When you get some rest, have another look and see that the article you cited was an op-ed. Opinion. Commentary.
When they WSJ reports the news, there's a wage gap. When they give their feels, there isn't. Do you see a pattern here?
Why is it for you when the topic is something you don't like numerical analysis becomes opinion/commentary ?
Sounds good (Score:3)
Sounds like a good idea. What I'd like to know is when has there ever been equal pay or equality in anything ? Even when it was just the 'good ole boys' club there were always the ins and the outs. Those that were part of the skull and bones frat scene and those that were not. The nouveau riche https://www.google.com/#q=nouv... [google.com] vs. the old money vs. the working class. No matter which side of the tracks you were born on equality has always been a struggle.
So does Slashdot have a quota? (Score:3, Interesting)
"We're required to shove one SJW feminist STEM propaganda piece down our readers throats every week"?
Like the media outlets responsible for #GamerGate, it seems that more and more Slashdot's moderators actively loath their own readers...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"We're required to shove one SJW feminist STEM propaganda piece down our readers throats every week"?
So I take it she got both the house AND the car?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Feminism nonsense isn't very popular here, but it brings in the comments.
Trolling its readership has been how Slashdot operates for years. Since it's all about the comments, I don't think it's as bad as you make it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like them, just scroll down to the next story. Why do you even come here to comment? Plenty of us want to talk about this, why are you trying to stop the discussion?
We need to look at this because of shit like GamerGate. There was a powder-keg of misogynist bullshit just waiting to go off, and that one blog post set it off.
Re: (Score:3)
There was a powder-keg of misogynist bullshit just waiting to go off
Maybe, but GamerGate wasn't it. Unless you can provide enough evidence to counter the vast tract of material demonstrating collusion amongst games journalists, lapses in ethics and the intentional vilification of the people pointing those out.
Since miso- means hatred, lets skip straight to the biggest manifestations of hatred: Death threats and bomb threats.
Draw me up a list of the documented death and bomb threats that have been validated by the police as legitimate and worth investigation, and lets see wh
Re: (Score:2)
GG is just a warner bros like cartoon, with some bird doing some small provocation and receiving a giant amount of overreaction that blow up in the face of the own coyote horribly.
Re: (Score:3)
gamergate? Oh, you mean the rejection of socjus bullshit by the gaming community?
I have a proposed new rule: nobody ever gets to appoint themselves spokesman for a "community" they happen to be part of. They can continue to speak for themselves of course.
We promise! (Score:4, Insightful)
I think if you read the actual agreement, I suspect it says "We promise to pay women just as much as we pay our male H1-Bs."
I say equal pay (Score:5, Insightful)
for introverts and extroverts.
Re: (Score:2)
Since introverts spend more timing doing their own work and less time distracting other people from theirs, they increase company productivity, are worth more to the company, so should be paid more to encourage more people to be introverted.
Re: (Score:2)
Companies tend to hire future leaders not hard workers. Regardless of the prospects of all those hires actually becoming the CEO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I say equal hiring opportunities for introverts and extroverts.
Because every company I've ever worked for expects to employ leadership material extroverts who can present themselves perfectly and think up of witty things to say in front of a panel of judges in order to get a job.
The entire premise is pure BS (Score:4, Insightful)
Lets do a little common sense here, I am a hiring manager and just interviewed two people with very similar qualifications, backgrounds, and work ethic, but one of them I can save ~20% on pay/benefits.... Wow, I wonder who I am hiring...
Wait, but you mean to say that the market doesn't work in this case, that all the financial market theory, best practices, etc., all cease to function once someone introduces the gender of an employee. Go back to college if you still think that (or more to the point go to college in the first place, just make sure you study a STEMS field, apparently we need more of them to drive costs down because we can't hire enough, and thus need more H1Bs, and yet wages are still mostly stagnant...).
Re: (Score:2)
When will people wake up and stop eating up this stuff?
When someone (us) fights back. When we say we're going to "buy" less of Apple, Facebook, IBM, and Microsoft, because their values don't align with ours.
I haven't made the same as a female since I was bagging groceries as a kid. After that, adult's skill sets widely diverge over time. Hell, there isn't a MAN with the identical qualifications that I have. Everybody's different...
Further, let's multiply that by the fact that I had to fight, threaten and give ultimatums to get the vast majority of rai
Re: (Score:2)
missing the point (Score:3)
Equal pay for equal work is a nice phrase, but this is not the way the world works. Forget gender for a minute, and think about whether this approach has a chance to work in any situation where we're trying to equalize economic outcomes.
You don't get paid just based on the work you do. The risks you take, your ability to negotiate, and your ability to leverage your existing finances can play a much bigger role in how much money you make than your actual work. This is why investors make more money than management, who make more money than the people doing the work.
This policy of focusing on salary, standardized benefits, and career development worked in the economy a generation or two removed from today. Now, wealth and advancement are generated through job-hopping or maintaining ownership of your work, not annualized salary. I think telling women they'll do well by sticking with one company and fighting for raises and career development is a recipe to create a gender wage gap.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why I don't discuss current/previous salary. It just punishes loyalty.
It's also odd that men get a daddy bonus when they have kids, which if you are right would make them more risk averse and less able to job hop (kids in the local school etc) and thus paid less. Yet the discrepancy seems to be down to then being seen as more dependable.
Women get penalised for having kids, which does fit your theory.
What Gender Pay Gap? (Score:2, Insightful)
The ironic part is that the feminists are too angry to figure this out
Easy pledge to make... (Score:2)
This is an easy pledge to make, if you pay people based on their education and actual years of experience. Why? Because - if you look at it that way - there is no gender pay gap.
All the studies that show a substantial gender pay gap either (a) equate different professions, or (b) compare people based on their ages.
The first of those is obviously flawed, because different professions are, in fact, different. This includes studies that compare average pay in an entire region, because women and men do tend to
Easy peasy... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So a word of advice to women in tech fields entering the workforce - stay away from companies that pander to you, you will be better off for it and have workers that treat you with real respect.
I'd rather work for a place that pays well, I'll work there for a few decades and retire. Besides, I'm pretty skeptical that anyone can earn respect from brogrammers, and I question why anyone would even bother trying.
Re: (Score:2)
So a word of advice to women in tech fields entering the workforce - stay away from companies that pander to you, you will be better off for it and have workers that treat you with real respect.
I'd rather work for a place that pays well, I'll work there for a few decades and retire. Besides, I'm pretty skeptical that anyone can earn respect from brogrammers, and I question why anyone would even bother trying.
Well I can see someone isn't going to be getting "Works well with others" on their performance review.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd rather work for a place that pays well, I'll work there for a few decades and retire.
Too bad that many employers these days don't keep employees that long. Heck at many companies you'd be lucky to make it to the point of qualifying for the health insurance/benefits package. Employee-churn helps to keep the costs of labor down when costs are driven up by government mandate.
The more that government causes labor costs to rise, the more ruthless employers will be forced to become towards the workforce in order to remain competitive, which will cause workers to grow ever-angrier & resentful
Re: (Score:2)
Was my first thought too.. Agree to something you already do anyway shouldn't be that hard.
Re: (Score:3)
The 'true' pay gap is 0.1-0.01% or something like that (a statistical error) in the western world and that may be due to (70-80% paid) maternity leave. The "problem" is the lifetime income gap, which has been closing but is somewhere on the order of -5 to 15% depending on the field. Educated women no longer stop work to take care of children and it's no longer odd that the father stops working these days as well.
Obviously employers would get an all-female workforce if it were legal for them to pay them even