Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 46
A definite and resounding yes. If a woman has the same skills and experience as a man, then why not? There are many women in today’s society that are the “head of household” either by choice or not, but the fact remains that many women need the same amount of pay that their male counterparts make.
What makes companies think that they can pay a man $15.00 an hour and for the same job a woman only $9.00 an hour. Woman contribute just as much if not more than some men, but all of us hear stories of woman having to put up with sexual harassment to get to the top of the ladder, which by the way is illegal, but rarely do we hear of such topics from men.
Women should not be expected to perform any less than a man and most times will go above and beyond expectations to prove they can be counted on in their various positions. We no longer live in a society, nor should we, where a “woman’s place is in the home”. Times have changed and the corporate world needs to change along with the times.
Many women work dead end jobs because the opportunities are not there as they are for men. Most women work full time jobs, and then go home and work another 5-6 hours in their home life. If you are the only income earner in your home, then you work doubly hard at everything you do.
For many women,college graduates, that have taken the time to learn a course of study, they should be given the same amount of pay, as the male gender. Just because you are a man, should not mean that you are given all the perks and pay, and women have to prove themselves. It should be equal, men should also have to prove they have the ability to do the job or task set before them.
I believe if there were more equality on this issue, there would be more productivity in our workforce. Until such time, as the corporate world figures this out, will they really be getting the best employees for the job?
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 62
This should not even be a question anymore. Companies needing the work done should pay equally for the same quality work. There certainly should not be any discretion. Whether the worker is a man or a woman should not be of any concern. This, whether the work is in an office, a factory, or where ever.
If, on the other hand, if it can be proved that the work is best fitted to a man because of his ability to, as an example, lift heavier boxes, run faster, or climb a telephone pole, or fit the description as a ‘male nurse’ better, then certainly his wages should reflect this change. But only for these specific changes. The same applies for women in the areas they may show superior abilities. No one will disagree, or I hope they agree, that there are differences between men and women. Not that one is better than the other, but their expertise somehow, and often, ‘are not equal’.
But, I reiterate, for the same identical jobs, whatever, store clerks, journalism, managerial, presidents, business executives, and whatever, the pay should be the same. Although there is much bitterness and wrongful discretion going on in today’s work place over the pay scale that often leaves women working harder and getting paid less, there are some situations where this should never be a problem. Although, however we might want it to be otherwise, there will always be conflicts of this sort. Men and women will complete with each other.
Yet, were I an employer, I would tolerate none of this in my employees. I would have as my guide the best one for the job; and I am sure most employers do this. They simply want to get their money’s worth and which one is better qualified gets the job or the pay raise or whatever goes along with a job well done. It is well for employees that not to do a good job and to shirk and waste time is to steal from your employer. They are buying your time for a certain amount of hours each week and they expect you to be there for most of that time. They are required to give you time off for lunch and two breaks each shift. The rest of the time you signed on for belongs to them.
That does not mean, however, they can treat you badly or refuse to honor you as a human being. This is where the same amount of pay for the same amount of work comes in. As an example, men are stronger than most women and they can do some work more efficiently than a woman can. That may be a situation where the less productive person possibly could be a woman. Then a lesser pay check would be understandable.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 92
This seems to me to be a very abstract, and silly, question to ask. For equal merit in performing a job with equal responsibilities, and with equal credentials and equal reliability – you get the idea – in a self-purported free society there’s no rational justification for paying women less money than men.
There are many mitigating socioeconomics factors that obstruct the attainment of pay equality; for starters, as was brought up in other articles, the homemaking work for which many (most) women are left responsible, for various reasons, is seen as a detriment to her work ethic in general, no matter the tremendous research that’s demonstrated that a child reared in day care, or by compassionate but otherwise detached volunteers, has a much greater likelihood of developing social or emotional problems than the child who’s directly attended to by their parent(s).
From a corporate perspective, it’s an understandable concern. While nobody (who considers themselves compassionate) could honestly say that, presented with the hypothetical mutually exclusive choice between completing a full day’s work and their child’s health, they would choose the former, one should also consider that capitalism is rarely seen to be compassionate. From a strictly corporate standpoint, businesses prefer those who prize their work and job more than, to put it very broadly, personal affairs. The real underlying issue, which also appears in general employment-type disparities between genders, is the various abstract social and cultural forces that push men and women into particular roles.
It can be statistically seen that there are several jobs that men will voluntarily take and others that women will. While viewing those jobs against each other directly would produce an incomplete and inaccurate assessment of the forces I’m referring to, they do illustrate their effect. What is the general social conception of a woman truck driver? ‘Butch’. ‘Bull-dyke’. Of a male nurse, or daycare worker? ‘Wimp’. ‘Fag’. There are stigmas associated with particular jobs, and as these jobs are voluntarily chosen by their workers, it’s tough to draw the line, or attribute either one entirely, to ‘general biological differences’ or social pressures.
Similarly, in our society, the typecast of a male role is hard, determined above most concerns including self and sentimentality, strong to stand alone, aggressive. The female typecast is passive, compassionate above rationality, in search of a
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 20
The notion that women on average get paid less than men is extremely misleading. Yes, it’s true on average they do get paid less, but there’s a reason for this. When people here these facts they simply assume it’s because employers pay women less because they are women, that’s just not true it most cases.
In these statistics people fail to take into account the fact that women generally take more time off work for bearing and raising children. Women simply work more jobs that pay less like secretary work, while men generally work more labor intensive jobs like construction where salaries are higher to compensate for potential injury. Also, men, on average, tend to be more involved in career building then women which also leads to help spike the “pay gap” between men and women. There are hundreds of other factors that influence these statistics as well. Heck, there’s simply more men in the work force than women. When all this is taken into consideration it’s no wonder the statistics come up the way they do.
In closing I want to bring up another point which totally destroys any arguments against me. If employers can get away with paying women less for the same job a man does as claimed, then why would any intelligent employer ever hirer a man over a woman in the work place? I doubt it’s simply because they have some strong sexist feelings and would rather take a loss in profit than hirer a women.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 71
Well Mr. Hamilton…I do believe you are wrong. Women are just as good as men. In fact, a lot of time we’re smarter and less stubborn. Think about it, women will ask directions and get wherever they’re going faster. Mean, however, will drive around for hours trying to find it themselves. What’s with that? I think, no matter what your gender, everybody should be payed what they’re earning. Seems simple, huh? And also Mr. Hamilton, what about the women that do make the same career choices as men? Should they be punished for a person’s opinion, like yours, on what women should be paid. Let the employer choose how much to pay, but let them pay all people that much, not just the men, and not just the women. And pay discrimination does exist. It seems that some men still think that they’re better. Those men, in power, are what have caused this problem. I’m not saying all men suck, but I am saying a lot of their views should be changed. Though I must say Mr. Hamilton, you did seem convincing, even if I think your wrong.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 76
Yes, they should. If the woman qualifies for the same type job, why should she take a lower pay than a man? Why would a female attend college and acquire a degree for the purpose of obtaining a job in the same field? Why would colleges accept women who want the same type degree as a man? So, companies should be required to pay men and women equally if they are employed to do the same work.
This is certainly a form of discrimination and should not be practiced by any company, unless the woman is satisfied with the lower salary. If the man has seniority, he should get the higher pay. However, it should never be justified by saying ’she is a woman’ and will have to take a lower pay.
I suppose that in mail service such as FedEx and UPS or the USPS, it should be considered that there is a legal limit on the pounds a woman should lift. In this case, if the man has to lift more weight than the woman, I can understand that. However, in the job applications I am sure that is considered but I have seen UPS women and men and our own postal carrier is a lady.
But, if there is nothing involved that would bring harm to the woman, she should be placed on the same level as the man. She has the same education and certainly a male CEO, or company official would be delighted to talk with a lady at times.
Sure, men are strong but I have seen some mighty unmoving, hardheaded women in my lifetime, also and they can be obstinate to the point, “I know what I’m doing. I can handle this.” Look at Condoleeza Rice. Never have I heard a word uttered unless it was to praise her. She bolts off to all these foreign countries with so much certainty and seems to never, never waiver.
If a company is union, then the women will certainly receive the same pay and raises as the men. That is, assembly lines, etc. which keep the companies going.
It is just not right to think a man is more valuable in the workplace than the woman and I repeat – If the woman does the same type work as the man, then she should be paid the same salary. I thought this was a problem that had been settled ages ago but, since I haven’t worked in years, haven’t given it much thought.
Maybe one day, somebody will wake up.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 90
Equal pay for women and men presupposes that the employer is actually comparing two equal candidates for the same position. Generalized statistics that can be manipulated to prove either side of this argument should be ignored. As anyone who has taken Statistics 101 knows, any set of figures can be presented in whatever manner the statistician chooses. Before we give our Pavlovian response let us examine the question carefully. “Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to men and women”? The answer has already been legislated. By law, US companies ARE REQUIRED to pay men and women equally.
What constantly fuels debate on the matter of pay, is not gender, but rather equal credentials and seniority. It is not the purpose, and should not be the purpose, of US companies to be the playing field that every special interest group wants to use to achieve its agenda, which rarely has anything to do with true equal considerations for a specific position. Rather, these groups want to take disparate qualifications and call them equal, but only if it is a man and a woman being scrutinized. No one ever presents these arguments if either two men or two women are being considered for the same post.
Before we blindly hop on a bandwagon it would behoove us to realize exactly what it is that we are so loudly trumpeting to the work place. Equal pay for equal work is, and should be, the standard of US companies.
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 28
It’s a Slippery Slope….
To my credit or discredit I am not consumed by the issue of women’s rights. I’m a woman, and they’re very important, and I believe in them. But I don’t think about them every waking moment. Well…maybe subconsciously a little more than I’m admitting.
But still, here’s the thing. Everyone has rights. Men, women, companies too. So we’re faced with finding a delicate balance so that no one’s rights get short shrift. Then too, there are principles involved. Companies should have the right to pay their employees what they want? Perhaps. Companies that receive funding from the government must apply equal standards to all. So, we’re left with some companies that do, and some that don’t. In the middle, are companies that don’t receive such funding but pay equally regardless of gender.
When an employer pays less, he benefits more. That money he would have paid out to that female employee goes in his pocket. Fair? Do we really approve of the idea that someone is rewarded for depriving someone else of equal pay?
Someone wrote that childless women make 95% of what men make, whereas women with children make much less. So, before we move to the issue of children, shouldn’t we ask why 95%? Why the disparity at all? Why not the same? Statistically, we could say 5% is not that much. But personally, when we’re right up against it, when it happens to us as individuals, and happens simply because we are female, we feel differently. What other message can lower pay for equal job performance possibly send to women, other than that they are inherently worth less as human beings? Do we want to say that to anyone?
It’s a little like when men grumble that they didn’t get a job because it was a slot “reserved” for females. Or that a woman got the job because she flirted with the interviewer. What gender of interviewer do you think she’s flirting with by the way? And doesn’t Mr. Interviewer bear some responsibility in that situation? OK, let me understand this: If a man complains that a women gets a job simply because she’s pretty and flirts, that’s not fair to the male applicants. But if a woman is paid less because she’s a woman, that’s fair to everyone. Does that make any sense? Not to me.
These women with children, why do they make a lot less than men? High absentee rates? Less devotion to the job and more focus on the children while they’re at work? Possibly for some, but definitely not for all. Need we be reminded that those “women-with-children,
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men? – Part 36
Should US companies be required to provide equal pay to women and men?
Let’s look at it this way. If the situation was reversed and the men were the women that were being paid less, would they like to have equal pay? Of course they would, who wouldn’t? It doesn’t take a genius to know the answer to that question. Men and women in my opinion are equal. Meaning that neither gender is better than the other. It’s pretty sad to me that it is even a question that has to be asked. However it’s understandable because women in the same positions work equally as hard and yet they are still are under paid.
I for one as a woman, would definitely argue the point that I do not believe anyone is better than me. So to accept the fact that a “man” in the same position as me, doing the same work is paid more because he is a man just doesn’t work for me. I think woman are still treated like second class citizens in many aspects of the way. Sadly enough I think that many woman just take it because the job pays enough or they have priorities that make it hard to find something else for the moment. That is understandable and if they stay at their place of employment then it really isn’t a problem because it works them. When people get mad enough they take matters into their own hands and that’s when change happens.
I think that as a woman we have many roles. We are an important part in the lives of many. I think that our voice is powerful, but actions speak louder than words. Many women throughout the years have fought for their rights to achieve great accomplishments because they have the desire to be considered as equal as men. Not in their eyes but the eyes of other men and women. I would love to see the day when woman and men are provided equal pay. However until women and men need to do what ever it takes to make that happen.
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.
