www.ditl.org

Then why have male employees at all?

Do you have any sources on this, because all I can find are sources that say the Wage Gap is a myth

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina ... 73804.html
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB100014 ... 2909957472
http://news.yahoo.com/gender-wage-gap-m ... itics.html

Sonic Glitch wrote:

Graham Kennedy wrote:I've seen a whole lot of job ads this last year or so, and I've never yet seen one that offered different rates of pay to men and women. Does that actually happen in the US?

You're not going to see it in the job ad -- it's not that explicit. For legal reasons, no company is going to outright say they don't pay at the same way but somehow at the end of the year the result will be that the female employee swarmed less for her work than a male in the same position.

I don't understand how that works. Presumably if they just started giving the women less money it would be noticed right quick. I'd certainly be like "WTF?" if my pay suddenly went down for no explained reason.

Do they, like, just slip more money to the guys and ask them not to tell any of the women?

Seriously, I don't see how this could work.

It pretty much only occurs at salary level positions. A company is hiring for a few positions at entry or mid-level in the corporate scheme, along with the job offer they offer a certain salary which may or may not be negotiable to some level. The wage gap occurs because the initial offer and/or the negotiated salary wind up being less in general for women they hire into these roles than for men. As for how they get away with it, good question.

Come on now, you have to be either obtuse or insanely naive and optimistic to not see how this could happen. It's like a sales advertisement that purports to "beat any advertised price" yet turns out to advertise an item that is in a very minute and inconsequential way exclusive to the advertiser. Then, since the item may be exactly equivalent to another it is technically not the same as the other, so the advertiser has to honor nothing at all. In much the same way, a woman in (for example) a middle-management salaried position can be relegated to a (for example) position entitled "associate V. P. of production control" and get paid x amount annually, while a male who does the exact same job can be said to be the "executive V.P. of merchandise" and get paid 1.5x annually.

Of course this can only happen in certain industries, and is nowhere nearly as common as it once was. That's not to say, however, that the process is extinct, because it isn't.

I'm not sure if these two Sikhs were doing this on purpose or this one just caught that lady looking frightened by accident.

Graham Kennedy wrote: I don't understand how that works. Presumably if they just started giving the women less money it would be noticed right quick. I'd certainly be like "WTF?" if my pay suddenly went down for no explained reason.

Do they, like, just slip more money to the guys and ask them not to tell any of the women?

Seriously, I don't see how this could work.

The stuff Mikey talks about certainly happened. And it probably still affects a fair number of people as a result of earlier discrimination. I mean a sixty year old vying for an executive spot would have been in high school in the sixties, almost an entirely different world on these issues. And to the extent there is still discrimination I wouldn't be surprised to find it among octogenarian business owners like Donald Sterling who might create discriminatory situations for the top positions where they affect the decision.

Otherwise as Griffin notes the wage gap is vanishing (or reversing in some cases for the students just graduating from college). Except when you don't consider the different fields people are entering. The issue there being artists, social workers, and preschool teachers aren't making petroleum engineering money. However that IS still considered a problem, millions are spent researching why girls aren't equally going into such jobs and figuring out how to change that.

Things like a prominent scientist in an "objectifying" shirt are the sort of things that are considered an issue. As a related example I remember reading a recent report detailing the problem of the females getting hit on too much at scientific conferences being an issue that drives them out.

Hmmm I should probably drop a funny pic to get back in the swing of things.

Lucky charms breakfast but with only the marshmallows! I wish I lived in Kentucky.

Lt. Staplic wrote:It pretty much only occurs at salary level positions. A company is hiring for a few positions at entry or mid-level in the corporate scheme, along with the job offer they offer a certain salary which may or may not be negotiable to some level.

Oh, so it's a salary negotiation thing? I've heard they do that in the US, I can see how that might work.

Graham Kennedy wrote:

Lt. Staplic wrote:It pretty much only occurs at salary level positions. A company is hiring for a few positions at entry or mid-level in the corporate scheme, along with the job offer they offer a certain salary which may or may not be negotiable to some level.

Oh, so it's a salary negotiation thing? I've heard they do that in the US, I can see how that might work.

Do you not negotiate salaries in the U.K.?

It's not a negotiation thing at all, it's a trickery and misdirection thing.

Sonic Glitch wrote:

Graham Kennedy wrote:

Lt. Staplic wrote:It pretty much only occurs at salary level positions. A company is hiring for a few positions at entry or mid-level in the corporate scheme, along with the job offer they offer a certain salary which may or may not be negotiable to some level.

Oh, so it's a salary negotiation thing? I've heard they do that in the US, I can see how that might work.

Do you not negotiate salaries in the U.K.?

They tell you what the salary is when they advertise the job. Sometimes a job ad will saysomething like "Salary £19,500 - £21,000 depending on experience and qualifications" or something, but I've never seen a job where they just expect you to ask for a salary and then negotiate something with them. Otherwise how do you know if it's worth applying for it or not? Stupid to go to the trouble of applying, going through an interview, getting the offer, and then find that they won't pay you a realistic wage. That wastes the companys time as well as yours. I'd certainly never apply for a job that didn't say what the salary was in the ad.

And of course, it would mean that two people doing the same job could end up with sompletely different wages, which is unfair, not to mention an excellent way to kill the morale of the people on the lower wage.