Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 66

You can’t come up with a sweeping statement saying women and men should be paid the same by a firm. If they do the same job and are equally successful, then fair enough, they deserve to earn the same. But a lot of things need to be taken into account. Just because men and women work the same hours shouldn’t mean they get the same monetary rewards at the end of the month.

Imagine a man and a woman work on a conveyor belt in a car production company producing fan belts. If the man makes 1,000 fan belts in a day and the woman makes 500, are you going to pay them the same? I would hope not. If so, there is nothing to stop the man going slow and producing the same number of fan belts as the woman. Equally, if a man and a woman work for a company selling insurance policies and the man sells ten policies in a week, while the woman sells twenty, don’t you think the woman should take home more cash come pay day?

One area which maybe a little darker is that of physical strength. For example, in the construction industry, a male can generally carry more bricks than a woman. But both are given 100 per cent effort – so do you pay on effort or results? That’s not an easy one. Sport is another area of confusion. For example, Wimbledon is going to pay the same prize money to men and women this year for the first time. Is that fair? Men are stronger, play five sets as opposed to three for the women – and attract more viewers live and on television.

Companies can decide what pay systems they bring in, but they shouldn’t be forced by law to pay the sexes equally for the sake of it. Let them create their own pay structures – if you don’t like it, you can always look elsewhere for a job. That’s not being sexist because there may well be areas where women get paid more than men.