Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire I Have a Sincere Question:

Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Admittedly, it's less and less of a problem every year, but it still exists. My last boss was a woman who was a managing director for a Fortune 500. You can guess she made pretty good coin; I'd swap checks with her any day of the week. But the company had MANY managing directors, and despite the fact she's been there 21 years and probably in the top 1% of those managing directors, she probably made 10% less than most of the others. And by most, I mean at least 70% of all managing directors made 10% more than her. They hide it by classifying her position/department as generally being lower pay, but I don't know many who buy that.

For my job title, there was me and 5 women who held that title before I left. Now honestly, I was much more qualified and had considerably more responsibility than any of the ladies in my job classification. But the job is supposed to be paid by classification. I had been with the company for 8 years, and I had the least time with the company of all in my classification. Yet I made nearly 20% more than anyone else. Now that would make complete sense if pay was based purely on merit. But our company breaks things down by job classification (so I'm told). So there may be a problem there.

When you do the research across the entire nation, you find that women typically make less than men when they do the same job; that's just how it works out.

Honestly, until I worked for my last company, I was in the same bucket as you; I had never personally observed such a dynamic before in my professional career. My managing director challenged me to do a little research (when I told her she had a chip on her shoulder...she does by the way), and it turns out that she was right. Still, she has a pretty big chip on her shoulder.

But honestly, with all that's going on in America; THAT's what people give a standing ovation for? Sorry, but we have MUCH bigger fish to fry where our nations problems are concerned.

Ummm... ok.



Travis

I've seen it in private industry multiple times. Both the glass ceiling for women and unequal pay for women. Always rolls up to management hiring and promoting that way. Seen it in a few gov't sites as well, for the same reason.

But it is FAR less common and pronounced than it used to be, and it's becoming much less so every year.

But how could the Prez pass up a chance to create another rift in our society?

See my first post. My job had a compensation categorization as well, but I got payed more because I (A.) was a producer, and (B.) was assertive enough to ask for enhanced compensation for my enhanced performance.

Maybe your lady boss was a top performer (maybe not), but you won't get more if you don't ask for more, and..... You have to be prepared to walk if you aren't adequately compensated.

Agreed. In the instance of my job classification, that's how I see it; exactly as you explained it.

For my boss, there were a lot of MD's and not many of them were what I'd call assertive. I think her's is a case of a little discrimination...only a little.

But I think you're onto something there. I think men tend to be more assertive in asking for good pay and that is something that has to be accounted for.

I was in a position where I could all but demand it, and my co-workers just weren't effective enough in their jobs to do the same. I got to a position where they knew if they lost me, it would cost them a lot of money to lose that knowledge base. My boss was smart, after I got my raise, and it was quite size-able, he had me train others. When I changed to another job within the company, 3 women did my job (initially it was actually 4). So in my case, I can understand why I was paid more, but the company CLAIMED they pay based on job classification.

Every move this POS makes is designed to garner blocks of votes:

Equal pay for women.

Higher minimum wage for the flunkies and uneducated.

More gun control for the fearful.

More giveaway "programs" for the lazy and inept.

A chicken in every pot.

Which is illegal. If it was so easy for you to find out everyone's salary, why aren't the women doing so and suing?

There's no gender pay discrimination in the public sector. My wife worked in the private sector and made a ton of money, as did a bunch of other women at the same company. But that's because they produced objective, not subjective, results. So it would seem that the primary place gender pay discrimination could occur is in the private sector in positions where pay is based on subjective results or expectations, not objective results. I'll assume that's the case with Kevin's boss. But as Kevin's states, "They hide it by classifying her position/department as generally being lower pay..." So the position was classified as lower - does anyone really think that in today's litigious and politically correct climate that a company would classify a position lower just to pay a female occupant of the position less - something that they know is wrong?

The 70% or 77% stats are one of the biggest myths out there. There may be some very small of amount of actual gender pay discrimination, but the overwhelmingly vast majority of the 70/77% discrepancy is due to choice.

There are challenges that women face in the workplace but gender pay disparity is pretty low on the list.

It's hard to believe that some still support this fraud.

I'm not sure what timeframe you are speaking of when you say you witnessed it. But if you did, how do you know there was an imaginary glass ceiling, as opposed to them not being qualified? Sometimes managerial picks can come down to personality, or their inherent ability to lead. What lead you to believe it was solely based on sex?


Travis

These are my sentiments as well.



Travis

Nailed it.

But what draws you to that conclusion? That's a key question. Unless you are the making selections for positions, how do you know the reasoning behind the selections?

Maybe she farted in the interview, maybe she is afraid to discipline employs. Maybe she never makes coffee after taking the last cup out of the pot.

How do you know it is based on sex?


Travis

If some women get paid less because they work less hours for whatever reason, that is their choice. If they are paid by the hour, and they want more money -- work the longer hours, and you get paid more.

I was a LEO for 30+ years. Our female officers got paid the same as we men. The problem for us was that if they dispatched a man to a call, he was sent alone most of the time. If they dispatched a female, they would send two guys as backup. Silly, and not very cost effective -- three people to a one people call??

As usual, Mr. Obama has interpreted the statistics to suit his needs. Lies, darned lies, and statistics -- in ascending order of evil.

Yes. I understand that and it's easy to dismiss it, but I still have to ask.

And (once again) how can the media never mention it? Conservative or otherwise, I didn't hear anybody on the morning news mention "WTF is this guy talking about, and why was everybody cheering?"

It's like living in the Twilight Zone.


Travis

Travis, the few times I was sure of it is because I was in good enough with senior management (VP's, CIO's, CTO's, legal) to actually hear it. Comments from them stating that they flat out could not hire a woman for a position because the prez/cio/board of directors wouldn't approve it. Or supervisors that wouldn't hire a woman because they'd just get pregnant and disappear in the middle of a project and never come back to work after they used their maternity leave. Etc. Etc.

Timeframe is last 20 years.

It wasn't but 30'ish years ago that I was working at a country club which had all the Jewish businessmen (and a few blacks) in town as members because the bigger country club in town wouldn't except any blacks or Jews. Those people running the bigger country club were running businesses for decades after that, and if you think their prejudices stopped with minorites you'd be very naive.

Yes, but again, it is not just Obama speaking to the issue. Romney babbled on and on about it during the election, as if it's still the early 1900's.


Travis

Thanks. That's a real world observation IMO.


Travis

I call foul on this thread. I have an insincere question, and I demand that it be given consideration equal to your sincere question.

It's about votes.

Fact is,..American women are among the most privileged group of people to have ever lived,...but they've been convinced that they're oppressed.

Being as how women are easy to fool,...they've decided that they want "equality",...and I have a feeling that they're going to get it in spades the next time conscription comes around.

But to answer your question,...women don't receive equal pay for equal work.

From what I've seen, they receive equal pay for a hell of a lot less than equal work.

Another comment on the matter,...

This world is overflowing with women who are looking for American husbands.

If you're a halfway responsible kind of American male, women from around the globe will beat a path to your door.

On the other hand,...there's absolutely no global market whatsoever for American wives.

The reason is simple, there was a line out of an old movie "There ain't no money in it".

Money can be interpreted in this case to be "mileage" to make it worth the argument. Anyone caught making any statement to the contrary will get eviscerated and regardless of the truthfulness, there just isn't a benefit for anyone to take that flag and move forward into that battle.

Women will get maternity leave and suffer the consequences of a lesser yearly salary for doing the same job a man would do, but no one would enter that component and many others like it into the discussion.

My mother taught at MSU for nearly 40 years and was paid as a professor, not a woman. This has long been the law and anything other than that is a mis-represented fact to try and advance the theory that women aren't paid equally.

Furthermore, what is wrong with staying home and being a mother to your children. I can tell you this much, Condoleezza Rice is known all over the world for her work as a statesman, but she isn't a pancake's shadow compared to the work that my wife did at home raising our 5 children. That monument is still growing and I my admiration for my wife and her dedication is endless. 40 years of marriage this June and I can tell you she may be one of the many housewives that haven't earned what they should have...