SA Footy

The fundamental suggestion that the pay gap is the result of a sexist in human resources is deciding to pay men and women differently (which is actionable) is laughable.

If one is going to try and defend that pay gap a far better argument is to suggest that it's a reflection of what society values, supply and demand.

Correct.

HH3 wrote:I see where you're coming from. But I don't see the world like that.

Humans are selfish, and I don't see a time where people won't be c**ts to each other. There's no stopping things happening altogether. All you can do is deter people with forms of punishment.

Also, educating people how to protect their rights would be more important in my mind than demanding, or educating, with the end of goal being provided a safe space or Utopia, because that's an unrealistic goal.

You have a very pessimistic view of the world.

I could easily argue that humans have a fundamentally altruistic nature.

Q. wrote:

HH3 wrote:I see where you're coming from. But I don't see the world like that.

Humans are selfish, and I don't see a time where people won't be c**ts to each other. There's no stopping things happening altogether. All you can do is deter people with forms of punishment.

Also, educating people how to protect their rights would be more important in my mind than demanding, or educating, with the end of goal being provided a safe space or Utopia, because that's an unrealistic goal.

You have a very pessimistic view of the world.

I could easily argue that humans have a fundamentally altruistic nature.

I'd call it a realistic view of the world, but each to their own.

Q. wrote:I could easily argue that humans have a fundamentally altruistic nature.

Well go on then, don't let fear hold you back..

Zartan wrote:

Q. wrote:I could easily argue that humans have a fundamentally altruistic nature.

Well go on then, don't let fear hold you back..

See recent posts in D7 thread for starters

My 2 c are that gender is not always the most appropriate lens to view a wide range of egregious social issues.

Using solely the prism of gender can provide a gross oversimplification to fundamental questions of inequity.

There's also the broader questions as to is inequity in itself bad?

jo172 wrote:My 2 c are that gender is not always the most appropriate lens to view a wide range of egregious social issues.

Using solely the prism of gender can provide a gross oversimplification to fundamental questions of inequity.

There's also the broader questions as to is inequity in itself bad?

Someone's been using their thesaurus

MW wrote:Someone's been using their thesaurus

They're my favourite dinosaurs.

jo172 wrote:The fundamental suggestion that the pay gap is the result of a sexist in human resources is deciding to pay men and women differently (which is actionable) is laughable.

If one is going to try and defend that pay gap a far better argument is to suggest that it's a reflection of what society values, supply and demand.

Not sure it is even the economical argument (supply, demand, value) that is at play.

I have never encountered a female who has been paid less than a male for the equivalent role in the same organisation, nor less desirable because they are female.

What I have seen, however, is where a female exits the workforce for a period of time to tend to a family, usually at a critical developmental period in their career (25-35). At a later date they return at the same level that they left (if they have the benefit of maternity leave and a right of return), or have to start again at or near the bottom. Meanwhile the male who continued work during that period has progressed up the chain.

When you see articles/papers about the gender pay gap, it generally refers to an average or mean. I am not sure we will ever have a solution to this unless it becomes a social norm for a mother to have a lesser involvement in their child's upbringing.

or a more significant role for the father....

Would love to see a situation where both parents have equal amounts of time away from work to raise children.

It just takes changing the way perceive masculinity.

If we turn the whole "bread winner" thing on its head and instead promote and support fathers that are stay at home or sacrifice to spend more time with their kids, then the norms of society will change as well.

Look Good In Leather wrote:

jo172 wrote:The fundamental suggestion that the pay gap is the result of a sexist in human resources is deciding to pay men and women differently (which is actionable) is laughable.

If one is going to try and defend that pay gap a far better argument is to suggest that it's a reflection of what society values, supply and demand.

Not sure it is even the economical argument (supply, demand, value) that is at play.

I have never encountered a female who has been paid less than a male for the equivalent role in the same organisation, nor less desirable because they are female.

What I have seen, however, is where a female exits the workforce for a period of time to tend to a family, usually at a critical developmental period in their career (25-35). At a later date they return at the same level that they left (if they have the benefit of maternity leave and a right of return), or have to start again at or near the bottom. Meanwhile the male who continued work during that period has progressed up the chain.

When you see articles/papers about the gender pay gap, it generally refers to an average or mean. I am not sure we will ever have a solution to this unless it becomes a social norm for a mother to have a lesser involvement in their child's upbringing.

There's also a considerable discrepancy in industries people work by gender.

I.e nursing is heavily populated with women and engineering is heavily populated by men. Engineering on average pays a lot more.

This is economics mixed with years of gender norms.

jo172 wrote:

Look Good In Leather wrote:

jo172 wrote:The fundamental suggestion that the pay gap is the result of a sexist in human resources is deciding to pay men and women differently (which is actionable) is laughable.

If one is going to try and defend that pay gap a far better argument is to suggest that it's a reflection of what society values, supply and demand.

Not sure it is even the economical argument (supply, demand, value) that is at play.

I have never encountered a female who has been paid less than a male for the equivalent role in the same organisation, nor less desirable because they are female.

What I have seen, however, is where a female exits the workforce for a period of time to tend to a family, usually at a critical developmental period in their career (25-35). At a later date they return at the same level that they left (if they have the benefit of maternity leave and a right of return), or have to start again at or near the bottom. Meanwhile the male who continued work during that period has progressed up the chain.

When you see articles/papers about the gender pay gap, it generally refers to an average or mean. I am not sure we will ever have a solution to this unless it becomes a social norm for a mother to have a lesser involvement in their child's upbringing.

There's also a considerable discrepancy in industries people work by gender.

I.e nursing is heavily populated with women and engineering is heavily populated by men. Engineering on average pays a lot more.

This is economics mixed with years of gender norms.

Absolutely.

Academics have also proven that as the mix of gender changes, so does the pay, invariably to the negative for women. The best one is computer programming. Once a bastion of military wives and considered low level secretarial type work. It was the bottom of the food chain. Until of course Men started moving into the industry in numbers. The pay (and value society placed on it) ... went up. This pattern is repeated across many industries and occupations. More Men shifting into it? Pay goes up. More women move into it? Pay goes down.

I agree that there isn't some secret army of Women hating HR managers secretly plotting this conspiracy. That's at the artifact level of Schein's Model. The pay gap is caused by assumptions at a much deeper level of our culture.