Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

content.time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 280 posts

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#81

Post by Gerardo1 »

door3 wrote: post #69
mrweasel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly "equal pay" means whatever you want it to mean. At some point the nurses union in Denmark argued that their education was roughly the same length as that of an engineer, so they should be paid the same on that basic. Completely ignoring that engineers spend five years at the university vs. the 3.5 years for nursing school and that engineers are pay wildly different salaries bases on their field of work. In my m…

Women are paid less not because their jobs are worth less, but because employers can get away with paying them leas. There are values other than market value. Society needs both nurses and engineers. Women and men should be equal not just in opportunity, but in outcome (ie, economic power). In addition, women are usually the primary caregiver and disproportionately spend more time doing domestic labour (raising child…

"Women (or whomever is the primary caregiver in a family or does more domestic labor at home) should be paid more for fewer hours in the workplace."

I think you have to work a bit more to support that assertion. I'm not opposed to the idea of some kind of compensation for home-makers, but putting that on employers seems backwards. Why should that not be a form of social support?

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#82

Post by PunchTornado »

ShadowFaxSam wrote: post #53

"Applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities" This is a trend that I have personally witnessed since joining the corporate workforce as a recent college graduate living in a major city. In general I saw my female colleagues getting promoted faster and moving up faster than their male counterparts. In no way do I think it was favouritism, I just believe our senior management thought these yo…

I don't think you can justify your position "these young women were better prepared and organised than their male counterpart in their 20's".

You say that women in their 20s are better at something than men in their 20s. I believe you know this is indefensible and if you would say the reverse you would get kicked out of your job.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#83

Post by crusso »

mcny wrote: post #24
mseebach wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems that GP did that, and learned that these studies ignore inconvenient factors.

What we should mandate is transparency. We all think we are expert negotiators but we are all idiots. We will all be better off if all salary and all compensation information is public and easily accessible. Sadly, a lot of people think they have something to lose and will never support it.

It would be an interesting experiment. Has it been done before? That could lead to some unpleasant things:

    * A lot of unavoidable angst as people of less worth to the business are proven to be paid less in no uncertain terms.
    * More internal strife as people jockey for identifiable rank within the organization based upon their salaries.  "Why is Sue paid $10k more than I am?  Sue wasn't at her desk all week last week while I was here busting my butt."
    * Eventually, many managers and organizations would just sidestep the battle by paying everyone the same thing based upon easy-to-identify metrics like seniority.  As a result, the people with more value to the business will find jobs at companies that pay them according to a better measure of their bottom-line worth.  With no one left but the lowest-common-denominator employees, the company flounders and fails.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#84

Post by wu-ikkyu »

crispyporkbites wrote: post #58
wu-ikkyu wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There is clear envidence for a “gender pay gap” - in that women get paid on average less than men. If you control for education, years of experience, and skills there is no such gap.

Indeed if you control for these there’s no gap in the outcome variable (pay) but there is a huge gap in the n variable (number of women). The question to ask then is why does that happen? Are the reasons for that valid? Are equal opportunities available? Do we even want equal opportunities as a society or an individual?

>The question to ask then is why does that happen?

Because women, more typically than men, raise children as their full time job.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#85

Post by Gerardo1 »

nerdymanchild wrote: post #78
Malarkey73 wrote: post #7

"He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do." It's interesting itself that more women graduate than men. But equal pay means equal pay for people with similar qualifications doing similar jobs. This comparison means nothing to me.

Quoted post unavailable.

Writing off people you disagree with as ignorant doesn't really help anything.

And even if you're right, I'm not interested in a society devoid of compassion.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#86

Post by door3 »

Gerardo1 wrote: post #81
door3 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women are paid less not because their jobs are worth less, but because employers can get away with paying them leas. There are values other than market value. Society needs both nurses and engineers. Women and men should be equal not just in opportunity, but in outcome (ie, economic power). In addition, women are usually the primary caregiver and disproportionately spend more time doing domestic labour (raising child…

"Women (or whomever is the primary caregiver in a family or does more domestic labor at home) should be paid more for fewer hours in the workplace." I think you have to work a bit more to support that assertion. I'm not opposed to the idea of some kind of compensation for home-makers, but putting that on employers seems backwards. Why should that not be a form of social support?

I’m speaking on the level of principle, not implementation. There are a variety of ways you could implement this, but I think that is a secondary question to the basic principle that donestic labor exists, is socially necessary, and is, unjustly, not compensated financially. Most people in this debate, even left-leaning people, don’t acknowledge that.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#87

Post by arkh »

PunchTornado wrote: post #77
Malarkey73 wrote: post #7

"He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do." It's interesting itself that more women graduate than men. But equal pay means equal pay for people with similar qualifications doing similar jobs. This comparison means nothing to me.

Aren't all gender pay studies like this? When they say women earn 80% less than men they don't take into account qualifications or jobs.

They don't. They usually take the average of all working men and average of all working women. Some go with not just working but "of working age".

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#88

Post by olavk »

door3 wrote: post #69
mrweasel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly "equal pay" means whatever you want it to mean. At some point the nurses union in Denmark argued that their education was roughly the same length as that of an engineer, so they should be paid the same on that basic. Completely ignoring that engineers spend five years at the university vs. the 3.5 years for nursing school and that engineers are pay wildly different salaries bases on their field of work. In my m…

Women are paid less not because their jobs are worth less, but because employers can get away with paying them leas. There are values other than market value. Society needs both nurses and engineers. Women and men should be equal not just in opportunity, but in outcome (ie, economic power). In addition, women are usually the primary caregiver and disproportionately spend more time doing domestic labour (raising child…

If women had to be paid more for the same job, it would be irrational for any business to hire women.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#89

Post by door3 »

olavk wrote: post #88
door3 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women are paid less not because their jobs are worth less, but because employers can get away with paying them leas. There are values other than market value. Society needs both nurses and engineers. Women and men should be equal not just in opportunity, but in outcome (ie, economic power). In addition, women are usually the primary caregiver and disproportionately spend more time doing domestic labour (raising child…

If women had to be paid more for the same job, it would be irrational for any business to hire women.

There’s a lot of things that are irrational to an employer, ie providing health insurance or limiting the hours their employees work. Fortunately labor laws exist and are enforced. And just to emphasize, I said the primary caregiver, who is usually but not slways a woman.

Re: Study shows salaries of young women 8% higher than men in peer group (2010)

#90

Post by jabot »

door3 wrote: post #69
mrweasel wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly "equal pay" means whatever you want it to mean. At some point the nurses union in Denmark argued that their education was roughly the same length as that of an engineer, so they should be paid the same on that basic. Completely ignoring that engineers spend five years at the university vs. the 3.5 years for nursing school and that engineers are pay wildly different salaries bases on their field of work. In my m…

Women are paid less not because their jobs are worth less, but because employers can get away with paying them leas. There are values other than market value. Society needs both nurses and engineers. Women and men should be equal not just in opportunity, but in outcome (ie, economic power). In addition, women are usually the primary caregiver and disproportionately spend more time doing domestic labour (raising child…

> Society needs both nurses and engineers.

Yes. And if more people want to become engineers, and if becoming an engineer is easier, then engineers will end up getting less money than nurses.

I mean... the more fun a job is, the more people will want to do it despite getting little money, right?

> In addition, women are usually the primary caregiver and disproportionately spend more time doing domestic labour (raising children, taking care of the home) which they are not compensated financially for.

I recall reading some statistics that (in germany) 80% of domestic spending is done by women. Seems about right.

> Women should be paid more for fewer hours in the workplace.

Uh. That's outright discrimination there. Either against men or against childless people.

Post reply on HN