Wage disparity

[BayView]

Interesting segment on ABC radio news this morning relating to latest ABS stats that men are earning more than women, and the gap is widening...

Lots of hand-wringing and "How can this be?!" etc.

The stat only applies to full-time positions, apparently.

I would venture to say that over the last few decades this has not occurred, and these latest stats are another example of a misrepresentation of the actual facts out there.

Here's my take -

Over my lifetime, I've observed what we call the "average wage" increase at X% per year, while as we know - the wages of upper management (CEO's Board Directors and so on), various professional positions, many upper-level Public Service appointments and positions...have increased at many times the average wage. Nothing really new there, except maybe the rates of increase above average.

Add to this the fact that many of these upper-level positions etc are filled by men. (The reasons why women aren't in them can be another thread again). So, most of the extremely high-end income earners are men.

Add to this the current state of our economy in Aus - fulltime jobs are disappearing at a scary rate, and being replaced by part-time and casual positions. There are very few fulltime jobs actually being created currently.

This means that a lot of women are losing their jobs in the middle-management white collar, and blue collar ranks, etc - down to basic manufacturing/factory/retail jobs..

Meanwhile; almost none of the highest end of town jobs have disappeared.

So, what we are witnessing is a consolidation of highest end/highest paid jobs remaining, and mostly filled by men, and the volume overall of fulltime jobs filed by women is decreasing.

Voila! More dollars - and more at the higher end - going to men....

Not an overall increase in mens' pay rates at the expense of womens'.

A good example is yer average nurse, teacher, retail worker, factory worker, hospitality worker, etc - compare exact same quals, experience and tenure and you will see the same pay.

Add to this areas where men traditionally don't work such as childcare (fulltime positions only) which are not well paid anyway regardless of who does the job; or say; architecture where it is mostly a men's domain and better paid than the childcare worker,...

And there's yer real story behind the stats.

 

[skater]

That's the way I see it too. Women may get the same education, and start at the bottom rung, the same as her male counterparts, but many choose to exit the workforce, if only temporarily, in order to start, or add to their family. When they re-enter, if they are career driven, they are now behind due to having taken time off.

Add to this, that in many high paying jobs, it is an unwritten rule that you stay back for an hour or two. You don't get paid any extra for this. As in most cases, the woman is the primary care-giver, she cannot afford to work those extra hours, as she must get home to look after the kids.

In several of the jobs that Hubby has had, if you don't stay back, you aren't really a 'team player'. If you're not a 'team player' you don't get promotions.

Then you've got the women who find balancing work with family just too much, so choose to stay home during the kids formative years. On re-entering the workforce, she now finds that she's out of touch, needs further qualifications, or has to start at the bottom again.

I don't see this changing any time soon.

 

[kathryn d]

IF women did get paid less for doing the same job, doesn't that put them at an advantage?

I'm a firm believer, the market should always dictate wages and prices.

 

[sanj]

IF women did get paid less for doing the same job, doesn't that put them at an advantage?.

How exactly would being paid less for doing the same job put someone at an advantage?

 

[TMNT]

ahh the good old wage vs gender debate,

unfortuantely feminists love to put in pointless evidence and arguments such as im a checkout chic and my husband is a neurosurgeoun, he gets paid more, OH WHY OH WHY

anywya,

here are a few facts that ive read over the years (feel free to disagree), im sure there is going to be studies that prove both arguments

women have a higher success rate and higher results at university
there are essentially NO jobs that if a man and women were doing the exact same jobs with same title there is a wage disparity
graduate positions, women get paid a tiny bit less ( a few %) the only reason ive read is the case is because women either cant or are ess willing to negotiate a salary at the onset
if you take a few years out of the workforce for personal choices let it be taking holidays or having kids, your career will suffer, simply
if you did take time out for kids, then when you come back you will need to go part time or finish at 3pm, no way yo ucan expcect to develop your career

TLDR
my opinion is that women and men doing the same jobs get paid the same, women start with a better start in life from uni, their average salary suffers because they take time off, and are geneally less motivated in career, you cant expect to take time offor go part time and expect the same affects as someone who didnt

 

[Corey Batt]

How exactly would being paid less for doing the same job put someone at an advantage?

Kathryn is suggesting that if there is a wage disparity by gender, employment rates for women would be higher.

TBH, I will be very interested to see the 'wage disparity' in 20 years time, considering the number of male vs female graduates NOW shows us a very significant trend.

 

[kathryn d]

Kathryn is suggesting that if there is a wage disparity by gender, employment rates for women would be higher.

TBH, I will be very interested to see the 'wage disparity' in 20 years time, considering the number of male vs female graduates NOW shows us a very significant trend.

What I am saying is:

All things being equal, if an employer is able to pay $100k for a woman, but a man would insist on $150k...who would you hire?

Now, if the employer still hires the man, there may be there factors at play, such as skater was referring to.


Edit:
Similar to buying properties.
Price is a consideration, but many times it is the conditions that more important.

If the woman isn't willing to stay back at the end of the day, that may be huge deal for an employer.

 

[boeman]

I would agree with above in that it is influenced by women taking time off at the most crucial points of their career to start or add to a family.

Late 20's to early 30's are the best times for both having kids AND working your butt off to get ahead, so it is a tough decision.

All of the sudden you re-enter the workforce in your late 30's or even early 40's, but there are men your age with 5 years more experience in the job.

I would dare say it is the biggest factor influencing the situation.

 

[Esel]

This article has some stats on wage inequality amongst graduates. It gives a few examples of where male and female grads earn the same, a few where women earn more but on the whole there are more examples of where male grads start off on higher salaries.

http://m.smh.com.au/national/tertiary-education/gender-pay-gap-doubles-in-a-year-20130103-2c78q.html

I agree that there are probably a lot of factors contributing to the gender pay gap and taking time out of the workforce to raise children is obviously a big contributor.

I know a few couples where the woman is better educated and earns more than her partner. I assume That this trend is growing and I wonder if this means that in the future wie might see equal numbers of men and women taking paternity leave And career breaks depending on who is the 'bread winner'.

 

[DaveM]

Easiest way to remove the wage disparity is to ban women from working. Problem solved. The middle east has this problem well under control.

 

[ellejay]

Easiest way to remove the wage disparity is to ban women from working. Problem solved. The middle east has this problem well under control.

I wish someone would ban me from working. No such luck.

 

[cimbom]

A problem with this is that the stats are not used correctly. Generally, what is done is that they just compare the "average" wage of all full-time male workers with full-time female workers.

The better stats to use are Employee Earnings and Hours by the ABS which looks and male and female wages by occupation. You can see the data here: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subs...CA257DD4007590C0&0&May 2014&22.01.2015&Latest

This still shows a wage gap in many occupations but it's generally less than the overall averages that are commonly used. I don't think the overall rates are that useful TBH.

 

[D.T.]

A problem with this is that the stats are not used correctly. Generally, what is done is that they just compare the "average" wage of all full-time male workers with full-time female workers.

The better stats to use are Employee Earnings and Hours by the ABS which looks and male and female wages by occupation. You can see the data here: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subs...CA257DD4007590C0&0&May 2014&22.01.2015&Latest

This still shows a wage gap in many occupations but it's generally less than the overall averages that are commonly used. I don't think the overall rates are that useful TBH.

If that were true and I was an employer, I'd definitely be looking to hire whichever gender was cheaper for the occupation as per your list. Wouldn't all employers do this?

Or is there a difference in quality as well?

 

[dex]

The reason women are generally paid less than men is because if we're ever on a Titanic which starts to sink, it will be the women and children who get to leave first. Same deal in a hostage situation. This 5 minute video explains it better:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imZ52DHBtug

A problem with this is that the stats are not used correctly. Generally, what is done is that they just compare the "average" wage of all full-time male workers with full-time female workers.

The better stats to use are Employee Earnings and Hours by the ABS which looks and male and female wages by occupation. You can see the data here: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subs...CA257DD4007590C0&0&May 2014&22.01.2015&Latest

This still shows a wage gap in many occupations but it's generally less than the overall averages that are commonly used. I don't think the overall rates are that useful TBH.

Agree. Here's 5 reasons why the gender pay gap is bogus:
http://www.returnofkings.com/25448/5-reasons-why-the-gender-pay-gap-is-bogus

In summary, if it was actually cheaper to hire a woman for the same productive output in the same job at the same company, companies would only hire women and slaughter the competition with significantly lower costs of operation.

 

[BayView]

If that were true and I was an employer, I'd definitely be looking to hire whichever gender was cheaper for the occupation as per your list. Wouldn't all employers do this?

Or is there a difference in quality as well?

Using my two career industries as a guide; there is absolutely no difference in pay rates for either gender.

In fact; if I were back in the golf industry again (god I wish I was - mechanics is cr@p and we'll have noone before too long; golf is a doodle com pared to this shidd) running ProShops; I would be looking to employ mainly middle aged women who are empty-nesters.

The blokes love them, they are usually more flexible with hours and are usually very "shop proud", and they can relate to the women golfers really well.

 

[cimbom]

There can be many reasons for the difference. My point was that it makes more sense to compare like for like than to compare a meaningless average.

 

[BayView]

There can be many reasons for the difference. My point was that it makes more sense to compare like for like than to compare a meaningless average.

My point exactly.

So, why is it when these sorts of stories hit the media, there never seems to be anyone who will come and out and point out the simple facts...they always get hung up on the "official stat".

We are turning into a race of zombies.

The banter about this topic this morning went on for ages.

Now; I think John Feine is a pretty intelligent guy, yet he didn't mention it, and noone else did.

It's like when they all whine on about the cost of housing in the media during the various intrerviews; yet noone on either side of the discussion ever mentions the Gubbmint fees and charges involved in a transaction.

 

[nomadic]

So, why is it when these sorts of stories hit the media, there never seems to be anyone who will come and out and point out the simple facts...they always get hung up on the "official stat".

I'm not sure if you're serious? The media are private companies who are there to make money so of course they will control what goes to air. They will never invite someone in to point out things which are the opposite of what they're pushing. In this case you can tell they're stirring the pot and want feminists to ring up and say how unfair it is.

 

[BayView]

I'm not sure if you're serious? The media are private companies who are there to make money so of course they will control what goes to air. They will never invite someone in to point out things which are the opposite of what they're pushing. In this case you can tell they're stirring the pot and want feminists to ring up and say how unfair it is.

That may also be true, and I wouldn't put it past a radio station or tv station to do that.

However; in this case it is the ABC who are not a private company.

Feminists were not involved in the discussion.

It was the male host and a male dude who was quoting the ABS stats, and their discussion of those stats.

There were no whinging females, but some did call in afterwards to comment and contribute...lots of anecdotal examples of various industry rates etc.

I brought it up to illustrate how the stats can be totally misleading, and how annoying it is when the media misrepresent them - not to turn it into some female bashing session; and the ABC didn't do that.

I will admit that John Feine likes to Liberal bash though - he really does let himself down when it comes to Political discussion and interviews. Some Liberal pollie will smash him in the face on air one of these days...he gets quite rude.

 

[Mooze]

Part of the issue for women is the expectation that they'll take time out. Whether or not they do is a different matter - but I've had managers tell me not to expect further training or promotion as I was married and of child bearing age - as they're wives had taken time out (and many of their wives friends etc) they expected I'd do the same, despite assertions to the opposite (and the fact that I have a stay at home dad husband). Earnings compared to male colleagues goes down (or stays stable while theirs goes up).

There's also the reluctance to have women travel for work if they have young kids - discussion today with my manager - she kept taking into account my son - lovely of her, but my husband is perfectly capable of looking after our son overnight if I'm away - something she hadn't fully taken into account until pressed to do so.

Annabel Crabb's book The Wife Drought is actually a very balanced discussion on this - how it's changed and changing for both genders.