In Tech, Wage Gender Gap Worsens For Women Over Time, and It's Worst For Black Women (techcrunch.com) 356
An anonymous reader shares a TechCrunch report: According to a new study involving more than 120,000 job offers transacted on Hired, a jobs marketplace for tech workers, the average female candidate is still making less than her male peers for the same work, and sometimes far less. Hired's data shows that 63 percent of the time women receive lower salary offers than men for the same job at the same company, with white women offered 4 percent less on average, and women more broadly offered up to 50 percent less in the most extreme examples. Along the same vein, for one out of every 10 job openings that Hired analyzed, companies offered white men salaries that were at least 20 percent higher than those offered to women. According to the American Association of University Women, it might take another 136 years for the pay gap to disappear entirely. Perhaps more illuminating in this new report is what happens to women's salaries over time, and who is receiving the lowest pay of all for the same jobs at the same companies: Latina and black women. [...] It found that white women with four years or less of experience actually ask for more money than their male counterparts -- possibly because they're armed with information about what the market is paying for more entry-level jobs. A gap in the other direction begins to appear in candidates with six or more years of experience, however, with white women in tech both asking for less than their white male counterparts and receiving it. Indeed, over time and across the country, white women in tech earn an average of .90 cents for every dollar made by their male peers for the same work.
The takeaway (Score:5, Interesting)
So women ask for less...and they get it.
Newsflash; that isn't discrimination. That's not sexism. That's individuals undervaluing they're worth, and not anyone's fault but the person that does it.
Re:The takeaway (Score:5, Interesting)
Did the analysis take into account time off for childbirth and care?
If they say they did, did they do it correctly?
Re:The takeaway (Score:5, Insightful)
Correlation != causation. Lets think this through. If a fully qualified black woman who is a perfect match for a given job will get paid 75% of a while male why the hell aren't all businesses hiring black woman and telling white men to pound sand?
It's more likely, as the article indicates, women short changing themselves in part -- and likely that they make different career choices than men. There aren't many IT jobs where you don't find your self working god-awful numbers of hours a week at least SOME times and quite a few where ~50 a low average. Not many woman who also want (or already have) families would willingly enter that type of work environment. With regards to race playing a factor, the single parent household rate is higher with black women than white -- again -- signifying different career choices and motivations.
You also don't see a lot of woman working on oil rigs, in the logging industry or commercial fishing. Long hours, long time away from home will usually equal fewer woman.
Re: (Score:3)
Correlation != causation. Lets think this through. If a fully qualified black woman who is a perfect match for a given job will get paid 75% of a while male why the hell aren't all businesses hiring black woman and telling white men to pound sand?
If underskilled people get paid less than well-qualified people, why aren't all business hiring exclusively underskilled people and telling well-qualified people to pound sand?
Answer: because the cause of them being paid less and the cause of them not being hired more is the same -- they are less desired. For good reason in the case of skill, but not in the case of race or sex.
Re:The takeaway (Score:4, Interesting)
But you're right about the short-changing themselves. I was talking with a female colleague who holds a PhD about getting hired, and she said "well, our wages are fixed anyway. They said you have this degree and x years of experience so that's the salary". We work in the private sector, so no, our wages aren't "fixed". You can definitely discuss your salary. You just accepted the first offer they gave you, instead of bargaining. They would have at least offered you a stock-plan if you didn't agree right away.
I've heard this in academia, too, and they're not really fixed here either. It's just a shitty and abusive negotiation tactic that is used to try to cut the salary negotiation short and it often works. Women are apparently less likely to call the bluff and press for what they think they're worth.
Re: (Score:2)
...That's individuals undervaluing they're worth,..
I had problems with that statement...Did you mean...
OR
Sorry, I just had to ask...
Re: (Score:3)
Gah!
Knowing me, probably both. I'm having an off day with they're and their.
Looks like I chose the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
Re: (Score:2)
Every week is the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't only get paid for what you do, you also get paid for your future potential and value to the company.
Women Don't Ask! (Score:3, Interesting)
So women ask for less...and they get it. Newsflash: that isn't discrimination. That's not sexism. That's individuals undervaluing they're worth, and not anyone's fault but the person that does it.
That was my thought going in. I've read quite a few books and research on the topic because I don't want to be the one who perpetuates the gap. But over the years I've learned a critical truth: Women Don't Ask! (There's even a book by that title.)
The data in the article is quite clear, and the article states it outright: "69% of the time women ask for less money than men". 70% of these women are making less than men because they didn't ask to make the same wages. While it happens more frequently with wom
Re:The takeaway (Score:5, Interesting)
So women ask for less...and they get it.
Newsflash; that isn't discrimination. That's not sexism. That's individuals undervaluing they're worth, and not anyone's fault but the person that does it.
So... women do worse in a system designed decades ago when there were no women in the professional workforce. That is, a system designed around male behavioral norms. Is anyone surprised by that?
The HR organization in my employer did an analysis a few years ago and found that while female engineers and male engineers of the same rank on the career ladder got paid the same (because the HR organization had previously worked hard to make it so), female engineers tended to be of lower rank. Looking more closely, they found that this was mostly caused by the fact that women nominated themselves for promotion at a lower rate. Promotion in my company is initiated by the employee seeking promotion, not by management. Promotion success rates for those who applied were equal or slightly higher for women, as were subsequent job performance ratings. In a followup study they interviewed randomly-selected high-performing engineers of both genders and found that the women were less assertive in all sorts of ways that seem clearly related to societal gender stereotypes -- and remember that this was a set of women working in a male-dominated field, and at the highest level of that field, so they were no shrinking violets.
The HR team attempted to counter this problem with a campaign to both encourage female engineers directly and -- what turned out to be more important -- to educate their managers to be more sensitive to the fact that women are often less assertive, and to actively counter that by regularly encouraging high-performing women to seek promotion. Within a year of initiating this program, they found that promotion application rates had equalized across the genders, with no effect on promotion success rates or subsequent job performance. In addition, they found that promotion application rates for both genders had risen (though women rose more). Subsequent analysis attributed that to managers also putting more effort into encouraging high-performing but non-assertive men.
The promo self-nomination process was designed with typical high-performing male behavioral patterns in mind, which turn out to be slightly different than typical high-performing female behavioral patterns. Nature or nurture, I don't know and don't care. The point is that the system was designed for men and that made it difficult for women to keep up. A slight alteration of the system fixed the problem and women are no longer at a disadvantage (not in that area, at least).
Re:The takeaway (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking of reading skills:
A gap in the other direction begins to appear in candidates with six or more years of experience, however, with white women in tech both asking for less than their white male counterparts and receiving it. Indeed, over time and across the country, white women in tech earn an average of .90 cents for every dollar made by their male peers for the same work.
The trick is you have to read more than the summary.
Verizon math? (Score:3)
.90 cents for every dollar
I'm quite sure that they're not asking for parts of a cent per dollar earned.
Re:Verizon math? (Score:4, Insightful)
So what if there is a gap? (Score:4, Insightful)
The feminist movement has made it abundantly clear that women are competent and capable of success, and that they do not need men to provide for them or protect them.
So....there is nothing for me to do in response to this information. The women can take care of this problem themselves, without my help.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The feminist movement has made it abundantly clear that women are competent and capable of success, and that they do not need men to provide for them or protect them.
I certainly believe that women are competent and able to take care of themselves. But once, when I posted something about men needing to stand up for what's right and not sit idly by, I was ripped up by a feminist who thought such a statement was sexist. Kind of leaves me not knowing what to do. Was I supposed to say: Oh, women are being abused and mistreated, but so what, they can handle it?
I guess the idea that we should all stand together for what's right was not acceptable.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The feminist movement has made it abundantly clear that women are competent and capable of success, and that they do not need men to provide for them or protect them.
So....there is nothing for me to do in response to this information. The women can take care of this problem themselves, without my help.
The second part does not follow from the first, because the first part is incomplete. What you should have said is:
The feminist movement has made it abundantly clear that women are competent and capable of success, and that they do not need men to provide for them or protect them, they only need a level playing field.
The problem is that the playing field is not, at present, level. Even when everyone is trying to be scrupulously fair, the system they're all operating in was designed and constructed in an era when women weren't in professional roles, and is therefore structured around typical male behavioral norms. It does not recognize that women are typically less assertive than men, for example. This doesn
Bullshit (Score:3)
Discrimination is illegal, and has been illegal for longer than most /. readers have been alive. It is quite impossible to have a more level playing field than Law. Your only possible argument would be to claim that there is no prosecution of discrimination cases, to which I will tell you that you are a liar. You can search PACER, News Papers, or your own favorite Web Search Engine to find plenty of cases which have a legal status (filed, in trial, court decision, court action) which includes findings fo
Re: (Score:2)
What you should have said (Score:3)
I don't believe .... professional statisticians
Read: liars. You just opted to read the ones foisting the same lie you choose to believe in.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not much in the way of reading or comprehension is expected there.
Re: (Score:2)
... i think you either didn't read or misinterpreted the last sentence.
Required ShoeOnHead Video (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not illegal to pay one person less than another.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you know that it's very hard to prove you are being discriminated against on wages? Most people don't know how much their co-workers earn, and don't share their own salary information.
When such information is available (government jobs, tax data in some countries, accidental leaks) the gap tends to close.
I know how this turns out (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We should also ignore vandalism because stopping it reduces business opportunities for craftsmen and destroys manufacturing jobs.
Anyway, I'd take that bet. Historically it's been the case most of the time, and in a field like IT they will either pay for talent they need or already have tried to replace you with an Indian.
you think that's bad? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
When I read "front end engineer" my first thought was of an operator of a front end loader.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ind... [wikipedia.org]
I can't imagine too many Eskimo women operating front end loaders. Not because they are not physically or mentally capable of operating such equipment but because a "front end engineer" doesn't just drive a tractor. They would also be responsible for the maintenance on the machine, occasionally getting off the tractor and using a shovel, picking up bits and pieces that fall off the l
Re: (Score:2)
"I'd use a hand cart."
You think I lifted these 300 pound printers on my back and hiked up a staircase with it? Of course I used a hand cart. I still had to have the strength to push or pull the cart up a ramp, the weight to counter balance the printer, and so forth.
The average American adult male is 5 foot 10 inches tall and 195 pounds. The average American adult female is 5 foot 4 inches tall and 165 pounds. Think about how much these prototypical people can lift or carry. Think about the weight of wh
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It is perfectly fine if it makes things worse for male (and preferably white) people. It is only discrimination if a woman thinks she got less for her clearly superior efforts.
Large statistical basis & perfomance (Score:4, Interesting)
Also for career paths in general, on a large statistical basis, women are much more likely to leave the work for some period of time to raise children or in some cases they marry have a partner that allows them to not work or work part time. This is highly disruptive to their career growth and their compensation. This I suspect, is the majority or any pay discrepancy between males an females on a large statistical scale.
Otherwise, I think the whole this is a political wedge to gain votes. I am a business owner and I suspect all business owners are going to hire the lowest cost, yet most productive employees they can. If women were willing to work for less and were such great deals, all companies would hire women exclusively. This argument falls flat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Correction, compensation is largely based on *perception* of performance. We all know people who bullshit their way into high paying jobs and move on when things start going wrong. Often they have job titles like "manager" and "CEO", but engineers too.
Hire only women and minorities! (Score:2)
Why don't businesses only hire females and minorities? If females only make 20% less or whatever number it is these days, then it would make prudent business sense to hire only minorities and women since they're on the whole cheaper.
This post brought to you by sarcasm!
Re:Hire only women and minorities! (Score:5, Interesting)
For some reason, corporations prefer to hire expensive white men, rather than cheap black women.
Re: (Score:2)
For some reason, corporations prefer to hire expensive white men, rather than cheap black women.
Probably because there were 1.1 million [bls.gov] software developers in 2014 and there are 6 female black software developers?
Re: (Score:2)
...and there are 6 female black software developers?
yes, and 7 of them are in my building right now.
Re: (Score:2)
The white men are expensive because corporations prefer to hire them. Demand drives cost up.
Lies, Damn Lies, & Statistics (Score:5, Informative)
If your interested, a good breakdown of why the gender gap [youtu.be] statistic is specious.
Look to Social Justice for the Answer (Score:5, Funny)
There is a really easy answer. I hire all men but on the EO report I write that half are identified as women. 13% identify as black and 12% hispanic.
This keeps the Rachel Dolezal types happy and we move on to more important issues, like getting shit done.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a really easy answer. I hire all men but on the EO report I write that half are identified as women. 13% identify as black and 12% hispanic.
This keeps the Rachel Dolezal types happy and we move on to more important issues, like getting shit done.
And she has absolutely no right to assume their gender. Sounds like you found the loophole!
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, because gender is just a social construct. It must be true because my college professors told me so.
Rachel Dolezal got screwed over (Score:2)
She was living proof that race is as much (if not more) of a social construct than gender, yet the same people who insist that having a functioning penis and testicles isn't a barrier to claiming to be female wanted to lynch her. I don't understand why racial identity can't be as or more plastic than gender.
I suspect she could have kept up her self-identification as black forever if she hadn't faked the hate mail and some other sketchy behavior. It's an open question as to whether assuming black identity
Source of the data? (Score:5, Insightful)
Searching for Jessica Kirkpatrick in Google returns a few articles about her where the highlight is.... that she is in fact a woman. Her own public social media is nothing but a torrent of women's rights and equal pay stories and articles. So we have a clearly opinionated data scientist working with a set of "proprietary data" gathered by a private recruiting organization which focuses on diversity. Was there some other conclusion that anybody expected other then "MUH WAGE GAP IS REAL?"
Re: (Score:2)
Searching for Jessica Kirkpatrick in Google returns a few articles about her where the highlight is.... that she is in fact a woman. Her own public social media is nothing but a torrent of women's rights and equal pay stories and articles. So we have a clearly opinionated data scientist working with a set of "proprietary data" gathered by a private recruiting organization which focuses on diversity. Was there some other conclusion that anybody expected other then "MUH WAGE GAP IS REAL?"
Since women are at least equally if not more competent than men, this should be a real incentive to only hire men if no woman is available for the job. Why when all other things are completely equal would you hire a person that is going to decrease your profit, when you have to pay more for the exact same output?
Re: (Score:2)
Since women are at least equally if not more competent than men, this should be a real incentive to only hire men if no woman is available for the job. Why when all other things are completely equal would you hire a person that is going to decrease your profit, when you have to pay more for the exact same output?
Please cite your source.
Ask one.
Re: (Score:3)
Black women in IT... (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Random side thought and completely unrelated to working with black people: I've also never worked with any known ex-cons in tech, which is another group of people in desperate need of quality jobs , but which you don't near the diversification police shouting to be included, or that they're being paid less. 8% of the adu
Re: (Score:2)
I've also never worked with any known ex-cons in tech [...]
I recently found out that I previously worked with a confessed murderer who was arrested and charged with the crime that he committed as a teenager but was thrown out of court for lack of evidence.
[...] and are often discriminated against by asking questions like "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" on applications.
I've always thought that the murderer I worked with got fired for being a douche bag. A coworker found an article on the Internet and forwarded the article to management. HR investigated the matter and fired the guy because he lied on the felony checkbox question. It was worded as: "Have you ever been arrested and
Re: (Score:2)
My son has zero black women in his pre-calculus and chemistry classes.
I guess they won't be working in technology unless we force a mix.
Re: (Score:2)
My son has zero black women in his pre-calculus and chemistry classes.
Good thing. I would be uncomfortable with adults posing as children in high school. But seriously, your point would be more enlightening if you told us the percentage of black students at your school.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a college. About 10% black.
Re: (Score:2)
I've worked with and work with several. I'm in the public sector. I have never seen a Hispanic and only one Asian.
Re: (Score:2)
However, she has a life. She's into about 50 things and simply doesn't have the time to obsess about tech and computers like a lot of geeky dweeb white men do, so she'll never be "the ultimate nerd".
None of my coworkers are ultimate nerds, probably because they have kids and keeping up with the kids is a challenge. Most of us have 20+ years of IT experience and paid our dues a long time ago.
In some STEM fields being an absolute dweeb with no life pays off and makes you more valuable to your employer than people that have actual stuff going on in their life.
It's very easy to get the young and the stupid to put in long hours. I did that as a video game tester for six years. Once I got into IT support, my employment contracts prohibited me from working overtime. Of course, I got paid more than a tester and made more in 40 hours than I did in 60+ hours as a tester..
Re: (Score:2)
The way you use nerd, it's derogatory.
I stated that my coworkers and I are not ultimate nerds. We're just regular people with too many things going on. How is that derogatory?
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently this is not stopping men.
Are there any other special exceptions that should be made to benefit women or is this where you draw the line?
Re: (Score:2)
We worked at a major company. This is my one experience.
Doesn't surprised me. I worked with an Asian coworker who claimed that he can be racist because he's not white. A walking HR nightmare in the making. Different strokes for different folks.
Re: (Score:2)
My friend would then say, "Is that so? What about the burakumin?"
Ouch!
Re: (Score:2)
And, yes, they code way better than you do.
I certainly hope so if they're programming for living. Except for an occasional script at work, I don't program for a living. Understanding programming concepts helped me solve difficult problems in IT support.
One interesting thing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So anecdotally, yeah. Women earn less per hour but get hired more easily it seems.
Making less money than a person who can't get hired is an interesting way for women to say they are getting paid less though.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics (Score:5, Insightful)
Hired's data shows that 63 percent of the time women receive lower salary offers than men for the same job at the same company,
That sounds awful, till you realize that from simple statistical fluctuation you'd expect that number to be 50 percent, in which light 63 percent seems to indicate some trend, but not nearly as big a one as the writer clearly intends to signify. How large is the average fluctuation? What's the probability women could have gotten such offers by chance (which would require knowing for e.g. the sample size, which, speaking of, that doesn't seem to be given in the report)? You know, anything that might reveal the statistical significance of the findings, which seem to be entirely absent from the report and without which raw numbers are almost entirely meaningless.
with white women offered 4 percent less on average, and women more broadly offered up to 50 percent less in the most extreme examples.
The report (linked in the article and here [hired.com]) says the average is 4% for all women. Also, "up to 50% in the most extreme examples" means "we found 1 case where that happened", which, again, you'd expect (in fact, you could probably find some extreme examples where a man was offered that much less than a woman), or at least, you'd *probably* expect (can't say for sure without knowing the variance of the job offers, which I supposed you could extract from the chart, but doesn't seem to be given in numerical form). 4% also just happens to be the average amount less women ask for than men. They also don't (AFAICT) look into issues like time taken off career for maternal leave (which, sorry, means you're going to be worth less due to not having been able to keep up with current developments, it sucks, but life choices have consequences), hours worked (statistically, men tend to work slightly longer hours than women: IIRC it's something like 8.4 vs 7.8 per day, but no clue if that is true in tech or not), etc. etc.
I should be clear: I'm not saying there isn't sexism in tech. There sure as shit is, for a lot of reasons, just like there's ageism, racism, religious discrimination, and a bunch of other -isms and -tions. But biased, politically motivated, and downright misleading articles like this one really aren't the way forward.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are assuming that there would be a perfect 50/50 distribution of the was no discrimination, but you have to account for those getting exactly the same offer as well. No one sits down and calculates a candidate's precise worth to the cent, they have a budget, a rough feeling and round to the nearest whole number.
Also, 4% is working over two weeks for free.
Re: (Score:2)
You are assuming that there would be a perfect 50/50 distribution of the was no discrimination, but you have to account for those getting exactly the same offer as well. No one sits down and calculates a candidate's precise worth to the cent,
I dunno what accounting they did, but the plot in the report clearly splits the population into 63% offered less, 37% offered more. It looks like they used an average value for the salary offers.
Not this again... (Score:2)
Repeat after me:
Can the person/animal/insect/alien do the job?
Discounted labour! (Score:5, Insightful)
You hear that corporations? There's a discount on labour! Save, save, save! Apparently if you hire black women they have identical skills, experience, and work just as hard as the average person in your company. Why are you hiring anyone but them? DISCOUNT!!!
Everyone says companies are willing to do anything to save a buck, but apparently, when it comes to labour, they won't. Weird, eh? I wonder if there could be another reason...
Re: (Score:2)
You hear that corporations? There's a discount on labour! Save, save, save! Apparently if you hire black women they have identical skills, experience, and work just as hard as the average person in your company. Why are you hiring anyone but them? DISCOUNT!!!
Everyone says companies are willing to do anything to save a buck, but apparently, when it comes to labour, they won't. Weird, eh? I wonder if there could be another reason...
From my experience in the industry, the difference in wages highlighted by this article would be insignificant next to the much larger wastes due to building the wrong thing, or building stuff that customers don't want, or running around in circles with changing requirements, or pursuing middle-manager pet projects.
I think the "another reason" you mention is that no one in the industry has figured out how to systematically use software engineers to the full potential, not by a long margin.
Perhaps its the interview process? (Score:3, Interesting)
On the other hand, i wouldn't be surprised to find the tech industry is actually more discriminating toward women than other industries, given that we already know there is rampant agism (reluctance to hire older programmers) and a culture that encourages workers to forgo family and other commitments in favor of longer hours and 'crunch time'
Re: (Score:2)
Survey sponsored by Verizon. (Score:2)
N/T
Re: (Score:2)
My guess was that this Math was done by one of those that think they get paid less while doing the same work (but obviously not with the same quality). Because competently done statistics consistently fail to find this "gap". Of course, the propaganda-technique of the "big lie" requires repeating the lie (baseless as it may be) until everybody believes it from sheer repetition.
Re: The reality (Score:5, Insightful)
It's always the same articles on /dot. It goes like this.
1. Trump did this....
2. Trump did that
3. Not enough women in STEM
4. Women don't get paid enough
5. Transgender people want their own bathrooms
6. Not enough women in STEM
Take your SJW sh*t over to Twitter where the rest of your unemployed friends hang out.
Re: (Score:3)
>* Universal basic income will not have people sitting at home getting high and playing video games
And what's wrong with that? Weed and video games are cheap. Would you prefer they be out running around committing crimes, possibly mugging you or stealing your stuff? Because that's the choice you have. Either pay them enough to survive and have a little cheap entertainment so they don't cause problems, or pay for cops and prisons and the economic effects of crime.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or just Purge the waste of biomass like any other cancer.
Re: (Score:3)
As gender is just social category (not to be confused with sex, the biological category) there is no difference between gender and "desired gender" outside of insignificant matters of social (dis)recognition. It's like if there were a room where only "nerds" are allowed; being a nerd or not is purely something you decide about yourself, and telling someone who identifies themselves as one that they're "really not" is descriptively meaningless because there is no "really" at stake; it's purely an insult.
Re: (Score:3)
being a nerd or not is purely something you decide about yourself
Surely it's just as much a judgement others make about you. Matters of social recognition are hardly "insignificant" here.
Re:Guilty (Score:5, Informative)
There is no wage gap.
Economists have debunked this time and again.
Re:Guilty (Score:4)
Economists don't know jack. The real world has debunked them time and time again.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There is no wage gap.
Economists have debunked this time and again.
Well considering the extra money that women get for harassment lawsuits, alimony and child support, pensions and property tax breaks when their military or first responder husbands are killed, free drinks and dinners while out and on dates, and other miscellaneous perks and giveaways, I'd say women are still FAR ahead even if they are making less for specific jobs.
That doesn't even take into account that women are now earning far more college degrees, and at an accelerated rate.
Re:Guilty (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet... no links? Just a statement, and that merits modding up?
There is a wage gap, it comes up again and again, but the *reasons* are disputed.
Re:Guilty (Score:5, Informative)
"There is a wage gap, it comes up again and again, but the *reasons* are disputed."
Define "wage gap". If we take the wages of all women and average them and then take the wages of all men and average them then we can see a "wage gap". This alone is not a problem since women typically choose jobs that don't pay as much. For example, there's a lot of women working as school teachers and a lot of men working as lumberjacks. We don't fault the men for the higher pay because dealing with chainsaws that can rip off your arm is much more dangerous than a classroom of kindergarteners. Women usually choose the lower pay, and safer job, over the higher pay, and more dangerous, job. But that's not how the "wage gap" is typically defined, and it's not how this article defines it either.
The claim is that if we see women and men doing the exact same job, with the exact same experience and education, that somehow this "wage gap" still appears. But to anyone that has done an honest evaluation of this "wage gap" has seen is that in reality there is no "wage gap". It turns out that long ago we've made it illegal to pay people differently based on gender, age, race, and on and on. If there actually was a real and honest wage gap in America then a lot of employers would be in court over it right now.
There is no wage gap. People that claim there is one will try to shoehorn *reasons* to make the case. Once people see the supposed *reasons* for this gap it all goes away.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As someone who's worked in the industry for about 15 years... the wage gap is real. Several of my previous employers published internal figures about it, but the public research as well as the anecdotes I've heard over the years all point to this fact: women are promoted less, get less at promo, are less likely to ask for promotion, and are less likely to be recommended for promotion. Over time this results in a wage gap between similarly experienced and qualified women and men.
Now, some employers take step
Re: (Score:2)
More like Economists explaining how career choices, motherhood, etc. take their toll.
Re: (Score:2)
Save 4-20% or more per wage and ensure only woman make it past the interviews.
Every company would be top heavy with woman due to the executive wage scale savings.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:A woman and I were paid the same (Score:5, Interesting)
There are many books on that, like "Women Don't Ask" and "Nice Girls Don't Get The Corner Office", where economists and business researches study why it happens. Several books on the topic propose that nearly all of the gender gap comes from women not asking for wages or negotiating for themselves.
Simply, men ask for bonuses, promotions, and raises about 4x more than women do. Men ask for more with each request, about 2x more than women do.
(Obviously there are exceptions to the groups. Some men don't ask, and some women do ask, but overall the trends are quite clear.)
Men are more likely to negotiate their wages at hire, nearly 8x more likely to negotiate. Some women will negotiate, but few do. Of those who do negotiate, most women will ask for less; perhaps for one job a man may initially ask for $10,000 more, the fewer women who ask for the same role are more likely to start at $6,000 or $4,000 or less. Men are more likely to ask for raises and promotions out of cycle, roughly 6x more likely to ask for a raise or bonus or promotion after completing an assignment or project. It is quite common for men to quietly approach their boss with: "I finished the project, I'd like a raise", or "That contract is complete, I'd like a bonus", or "I just landed this deal for the company worth $x, I'd like a bonus for that." Women almost never do that. (The stats come from several studies in the books mentioned above.)
When performance reviews come around, men usually write more self-praise, take credit for accomplishments, and ask firmly for a large raise and bonus; women tend to deflect praise to the team and ask for minimal rewards, often even asking less than COLA (effectively taking a pay cut). In reviews, I've seen that women are also more likely to list their faults and problems and areas for improvement instead of listing their accomplishments.
Men usually take an active role in talking with their bosses to get the raises and promotions and bonuses. Women will often talk to their peers, particularly to their female co-workers, but will usually assume that their actions speak for themselves and not mention it to the boss. Of course, the boss sees a team where everything is working well, hears no complaints, hears no requests for more money and promotions, and lets the team carry on.
The various authors point out that it isn't due to a lack of negotiating skill, it applies even to fields in marketing and law where persuasive negotiation is critical and the women are well-trained, yet for many reasons women tend not to negotiate on their own behalf.
Re:Thirst? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
4. Treat men like second class citizens even if they're more qualified than the other female applicants because quotas.
Slashdot and their worthless SJW shit can fucking blow me.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have no self-respect, sure, that will work. You could also become a politician.
Re: (Score:2)
True, and no, it is not a step up at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, they mean to say "the same work done better", because clearly women are superior in any regards. But that dies fail any real statistical test to badly that they compromised by suggesting it is "the same". It is not. While the women with excellent tech skills are comparable in result quality and performance (and get paid the same), there are a lot fewer of them. The reason for any such wage gap is that is a lot easier for women to be lazy than for men and that there is a faction of women that use t