Originally Posted By skinnerbox <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-tom-harkin/women-deserve-equal-pay-f_b_543639.html" target="_blank">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...639.html</a> "On April 20th, Americans will observe Equal Pay Day -- the date that marks the 110 extra days that women must work into 2010 in order to equal what men earned in 2009. Nearly half a century after Congress enacted the Equal Pay Act, too many women in this country still do not get paid what men do for the exact same work. On average, a woman makes only 77 cents for every dollar that a man makes. The circumstances are even worse for Latinas and women of color. This is wrong and unjust. But, even more, it threatens the economic security of our families. The fact is millions of Americans are dependent on a woman's pay-check just to get by, put food on the table, pay for child care, and deal with rising health care bills. Two-thirds of mothers bring home at least a quarter of their family's earnings. In many families, the woman is the sole breadwinner. On average, women lose an estimated $700,000 over their lifetimes due to unequal pay practices, and this inequality means real hardships for their families. And, while many factors influence a worker's earnings -- including educational attainment, work experience, and family status -- even when controlling for many of these variables, a substantial portion of the wage gap cannot be explained by anything but discrimination." (The rest of the article continues at the link.) To tie this directly to Disney, here's an interesting post on the TAG blog from last year, about the form letter Disney used to send out in 1938 to aspiring female animators, seeking employment with the Mouse: <a href="http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/disney-rejection-letter-revisited.html" target="_blank">http://animationguildblog.blog...ted.html</a> Steve Hulett, TAG's business rep, succinctly sums up today's gender based discrimination: "Happily, we're a long way from the days when those kinds of letters went out. Less happily, much of animation is still too much of an old boys' network. You'll have to look long and hard to find a lot of women in high creative positions at many of the large animation studios. (It was only a couple of years back I heard story artist and feature director Brenda Chapman jokingly refer to herself as "the token woman" at Pixar.)"
Originally Posted By barboy Women tennis players(WTA) should not get the same pay as men(ATP) at grand slam events---- they deserve less.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 It's really amazing that here in 2010 there are still women who get less pay than a man in the same position. How is this still going on? (Of course, it still baffles me how much discrimination there is towards gay people too!) I'm actually surprised that more women don't take up this fight and demand equal pay for equal work. What happened to the fighting spirit we saw back in the 60s and 70s? It seems like people have just given up. (The same can probably be said for the gay community too - we just don't fight all that hard to attain our rights.) I don't know if we all have become to comfortable to not care anymore, or just lazy, but something should really be done to motivate people again! (Of course, I probably won't be getting off my lazy behind to do anything either, and will quietly keep hoping someone else will take up the cause! Sometimes you just have to own-up to being a hypocrite!)
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones There is certainly some difference in wages that is explained by discrimination, but there is also some difference explained by differences between men and women (one example is that men take on riskier jobs that, all things being equal, pay a higher wage). The point is that it's not all discrimination, and researchers have gone back and forth over just how much is based on discrimination.
Originally Posted By DAR Let me guess 1. It's valid when it comes to the sports world, not in tennis, who actually follows tennis. 2. This is barboy we're talking about and it's 420, just saying.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones Having said that, how can you really tell if you're being exploited? For example, my girlfriend works at a law firm doing the exact same job that an attorney does, plus does paralegal work, and oversees a group of paralegals, including reviewing their work. She is paid $18 per hour for this. The paralegal wage is $12-14 per hour. She has observed a male paralegal promoted to attorney, who has similar credentials to hers. Is it sexism or is it something else? I wonder if she is not being promoted because of the recession (her firm is doing pretty well, though). I wonder if the male attorney was more aggressive in his pursuits (she does not inquire about open positions or promotions). I feel the same way about racism. Am I not able to find a better job because of my last name, or am I just unqualified? I have no idea.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones Also, I would like to see how many more days a bald person has to work in 2010 to equal what a person with long, luxurious hair earned in 2009. I'd also love to see how many more days a short person must work to equal what a tall person made in 2009.
Originally Posted By barboy At grand slam events(Aust., French, Wimb., US Open): I. Men do more "work" women play best of 3 sets per match(one must win 2 sets to win the match)....... so sometimes women play 2 sets and other times they play 3. men play best of 5 sets(one must win 3 sets to win the match)...... so sometimes men play 3 or 4 sets and other times 5. ll. Men draw more stadium spectators and TV viewers(money). At grand slams men do more work and bring in more money so they deserve more spoils than the women players.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "Nearly half a century after Congress enacted the Equal Pay Act, too many women in this country still do not get paid what men do for the exact same work. On average, a woman makes only 77 cents for every dollar that a man makes." Also, this statement is false. the 77 cents figure accounts for all jobs, not holding constant things like skills, experience and other stuff. When you control for everything, it was 88 cents 12 years ago, and I'm sure the figure is higher today. I think we're headed in the right direction at least.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>She is paid $18 per hour for this. The paralegal wage is $12-14 per hour. She has observed a male paralegal promoted to attorney, who has similar credentials to hers. Is it sexism or is it something else? << Don't you have to pass the Bar to be an "attorney" (practice law?). Just wondering.
Originally Posted By barboy Until Dinara Safina(Russian WTA #3 in world) pulls in the viewers the as much as Rafael Nadal(Spanish ATP #3 in world) and plays best of 5 sets per match at a "slam" people like Billy Jean King and Navratolova should stop their unfounded rants about equal gender pay in tennis.
Originally Posted By ecdc Equal Pay Day, Pot Day, and Hitler's Birthday all on the same day? Coincidence? I think not, fellow patriots! This is all part of a government scheme to move us towards Nazism. If I had a chalkboard and a bucket full of tears right not, I could prove it to you.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones Also published today. Women are getting advanced degrees in higher numbers than men. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/04/20/census.women.advanced.degrees/index.html?iref=allsearch" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING...llsearch</a> This will surely narrow the wage gap even more. "Don't you have to pass the Bar to be an "attorney" (practice law?)." She graduated from a Tier 1 law school and passed the California state bar exam on her first attempt. Like I said, she is doing all the work of an attorney, including representing clients in court, but she is not paid as one.
Originally Posted By hopemax Then there is the study out of the Netherlands about women who do or don't change their name after marriage <a href="http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/women-work-and-a-name-change/" target="_blank">http://economix.blogs.nytimes....-change/</a> "Another experiment asked students to judge fictional job candidates for a human resource manager position. Women who took their partners’ names were less likely to be hired by the study’s participants, and their salaries were estimated to be significantly lower (a difference of 861.21 euros, or about $1,172.36)."
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<stop their unfounded rants about equal gender pay in tennis>> I'm not sure that tennis, or any sport for that matter, is a good example here. If I understand correctly, players are paid a salary based on the amount of money they bring in - either for the team, or in tickets sales, etc. And let's face it, most women's sports just don't have the same fan-base as men's sports - hence the players make less money. So, while you may have a man and woman tennis player of equal skill, I don't think you could make the claim that the woman would bring in the same amount of money as the man. (But what do I know - I know very little about tennis.) It would be easier to make the comparison if we had a sport where men and women played together on the same team.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <men play best of 5 sets(one must win 3 sets to win the match)...... so sometimes men play 3 or 4 sets and other times 5.> Yes, I know. But this itself is a fairly arbitrary tradition that could easily be changed and bears no real relation to "value." <ll. Men draw more stadium spectators and TV viewers(money).> Right now they do. But these things fluctuate. Hell, 25 years ago I remember the commentary on TV when men's tennis was in the doldrums (largely because the male #1 was the non-charismatic and non-American Ivan Lendl) and women's tennis was flying high and drawing greater numbers. And even today I don't believe the numbers are radically different for TV, and I don't believe the slams charge lower ticket prices for women's matches. King and Navratilova are right. Women are doing essentially the same job (one could even argue that shorter matches are better for the venue - more matches and more money per day) and when you pay men and women differently, it sends a bad message. I think most tournaments pay equally any more, in fact. And if they don't, they should. My question #2 remains: where did that come from? Equal Pay Day is about all working people country-wide; professional tennis players make up about .00000001% of that, so it seems strange to even bring it up.
Originally Posted By DAR The sports analogy is kind of a bad one because it's true because men and women don't play on the same teams. And let's face it Lebron James should and will make more money than the top WNBA player because they don't draw in the revenue. Now let's think of something like the entertainment industry. Take Sandra Bullock and Tom Cruise. Both are big stars but right now for their next projects, Bullock should make more than Cruise, why? Bullock's last two films made close to 400 million domestic while Cruise's made maybe half that. Naturally at this time in their respective career's Bullock should make more money(and again Sandra if you need someone to console you, I'm here. I'm here.) And why should she make more? Not because she's a woman, but performance. And when it comes to real day to day work that's how it should be looked at and how I'll look at you don't get paid more or less because you're a man, woman, straight, gay, black, white, hispanic, asian, you get paid based on your performance.
Originally Posted By DAR Oh and women in the porn industry make much more than the men or so I've been told.
