Equal Pay for Equal Work

[dr.d]

Yesterday prez Obama signed an EO supporting women's ability to sue for equal pay...Today, the Senate will vote on a bill to increase realization of pay equity for all employees.
Over 50 years after the Equal Pay Act was passed, women still make .77 to every $ men make...for the same work with the same training and experience.
Apparently, the EPA is either being ignored or has no teeth...And something needs to be done about it.
Kudos to the prez for leading the effort to correct this great wrong...



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[martybegan]

Yesterday prez Obama signed an EO supporting women's ability to sue for equal pay...Today, the Senate will vote on a bill to increase realization of pay equity for all employees.
Over 50 years after the Equal Pay Act was passed, women still make .77 to
every $ men make...for the same work with the same training and experience.
Apparently, the EPA is either being ignored or has no teeth...And something needs to be done about it.
Kudos to the prez for leading the effort to correct this great wrong...



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

You have a link for your numbers?

 

[PredFan]

Equal pay for equal work is already the law. If Barry's numbers are true (and there's no reason to believe this liar) then the law isn't working.

Hell, Obama himself first even obey the law. The women working for him make less than the men. He's not only a liar, he's a hypocrite.

 

[BobPlumb]

Why not just start charging employers with violating the current law?

 

[Granny]

I get so sick of this stuff - 77 cents? This equality crap in everything that touches our lives is ridiculous. Being paid equal pay right down to the penny is a bit much. If Mary Sue has 10 pairs of Gloria Vanderbilt jeans then every woman in the country is ENTITLED to have 10 pair of Gloria Vanderbilt jeans in every cut or style that Mary Sue has. If Marcus has a Porsche, then everybody else in the country is ENTITLED to have a Porsche - and it's got to have EVERY feature that Marcus' Porsche has - right down to the EXACT mileage per gallon to the last drop - never mind the driving habits, road/weather/topographical differences and on and on and on.

We have enough problems to deal with in this country and a 77 cent pay differential should not be one of them.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Bad enough that employers still get away with blatant discrimination but some of our own people are in favor of it.

My bet is that this vote will follow party lines - Dems are in favor of Constitutionally guaranteed equality, Repubs are against it.

Edited to add "some of" because I know that not all Americans are stupid.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Yesterday prez Obama signed an EO supporting women's ability to sue for equal pay...Today, the Senate will vote on a bill to increase realization of pay equity for all employees.
Over 50 years after the Equal Pay Act was passed, women still make .77 to
every $ men make...for the same work with the same training and experience.
Apparently, the EPA is either being ignored or has no teeth...And something needs to be done about it.
Kudos to the prez for leading the effort to correct this great wrong...



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

That's a lie.

Stunning revelation; you're a liberal and don't know it's a lie after over a year of the "research" being debunked.

liberals, tell them a divisive lie and they will believe it till the death, b/c learning for themselves is hard, especially if it has numbers.

 

[martybegan]

Bad enough that employers still get away with blatant discrimination but our own people are in favor of it.

My bet is that this vote will follow party lines - Dems are in favor of Constitutionally guaranteed equality, Repubs are against it.

Dems are in favor of a law that will result in bully lawyer tactics based on flawed data to make companies pay up or face a lawsuit.

Its always the trial lawyers that win with Dem laws.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Why not just start charging employers with violating the current law?

b/c it's not happening


this is all a pr stunt for the election season, nothing more.

dems think women are dumb and will use this to divide them

 

[Two Thumbs]

Bad enough that employers still get away with blatant discrimination but some of our own people are in favor of it.

My bet is that this vote will follow party lines - Dems are in favor of Constitutionally guaranteed equality, Repubs are against it.

Edited to add "some of" because I know that not all Americans are stupid.

your lies have been debunked again and again, with you reading the actual facts.


just further proof that libs are not able to learn.

you all really are just that fucking dumb

 

[DGS49]

EVERYONE supports equal pay for equal work, but (a) there is no way to force it by Federal Decree, and (b) the "77 cents for every dollar" number is a total myth.

When allowing for
- education,
- experience,
- hours worked (including willingness to travel overnight),

The mythical differential almost goes away.

The remainder of it is explained by women who VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE to work in fields with low up-side potential, like teaching, social work, and nursing, as well as the fact that the jobs at the bottom of the scale for women tend largely to be food service jobs relying on tip income. The male counterpart jobs - janitorial, security guard, pay close to minimum wage, but more than food service (not counting tips).

The true effect of the Obama Executive Order will be that government contractors will have more administration to do, may make a negligible few changes to their staffing and hiring practices, and the additional costs thereof will be passed on the U.S. taxpayers in the form of higher prices for the goods and services procured by the Federal Government. The biggest single impact would be on construction contracts, where the U.S. taxpayers are ALREADY paying too much due to the perverse Davis Bacon requirements

But what the fuck, right? It won't cost Barry anything and some stupid women might even believe that there is some benefit.

 

[williepete]

I heard this question on the radio yesterday and no one was able to give a good answer:

"If women make less than men for the same job, why would any employer in their right mind ever hire a man?"

"...the President of the United States reciting a massively discredited factoid. The 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for differences in occupations, positions, education, job tenure, or hours worked per week. When all these relevant factors are taken into consideration, the wage gap narrows to about five cents. And no one knows if the five cents is a result of discrimination or some other subtle, hard-to-measure difference between male and female workers."

MORE: No, Women Don?t Make Less Money Than Men - The Daily Beast

 

[Defiant1]

There is no such thing as "equal work" or "equal pay."

Everybody doesn't start their job on the same day, they don't start with the same credentials, they don't work the same hours, they don't progress at the same rate.

Barring union mentality, there is no way to compare two people doing the same job and say they are equal.

 

[DGS49]

And by the way, it is already against the law to punish someone for disclosing their salary to co-workers.

"...the National Labor Relations Act contains a provision, Section 7 (29 U.S.C. § 157), that gives all employees the right to "engage in concerted activities", including the right to discuss their terms and conditions of employment with each other. Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA (29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1)) makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer to deny or limit the Section 7 rights of employees. Based upon those two provisions, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has taken the position for decades now that employers may not prohibit employees from discussing their pay and benefits, and that any attempts to do so actually violate the NLRA. Courts have basically uniformly supported that position. Moreover, those particular sections of the NLRA apply to both union and non-union employees, so there is no exception made for companies where the employees are non-unionized."

 

[novasteve]

Another fraud libs are pushing

 

[DGS49]

My wife has worked for a large bank for many years (34, to be exact). When she was hired initially - a recent college grad - she was hired as a teller, because basically all women were hired as tellers. Other people she knew (men) with the same credentials were hired as Management Trainees.

It took her 5 years to get into Management, and when she did, her salary was below the "minimum" for her positions for years. This was because the bank had rules about the maximum allowable raises, and since she started at such a low level, even with the maximum raises it was not enough to bring her up to the minimum for her position.

In the worst case, her boss was told to give her two reviews a year until she caught up, but he CUT THE RAISES IN HALF due to the fact that she was getting two a year! It took her two years to get to someone high enough in the organization to complain and straighten this guy out.

In short, she was paid at least 25% less and was at least 4 years behind in her career progression because she had a vagina.

I believe this has been corrected in recent years (she makes more than I do, as a low-level corporate attorney), but we can't know for sure because THEY ARE PROHIBITED FROM TALKING WITH THEIR PEERS ABOUT SALARY AND BONUS.

Hmmm.

 

[williepete]

At least the White House is setting the proper example.

Oh, wait...

 

[Defiant1]

My wife has worked for a large bank for many years (34, to be exact). When she was hired initially - a recent college grad - she was hired as a teller, because basically all women were hired as tellers. Other people she knew (men) with the same credentials were hired as Management Trainees.

It took her 5 years to get into Management, and when she did, her salary was below the "minimum" for her positions for years. This was because the bank had rules about the maximum allowable raises, and since she started at such a low level, even with the maximum raises it was not enough to bring her up to the minimum for her position.

In the worst case, her boss was told to give her two reviews a year until she caught up, but he CUT THE RAISES IN HALF due to the fact that she was getting two a year! It took her two years to get to someone high enough in the organization to complain and straighten this guy out.

In short, she was paid at least 25% less and was at least 4 years behind in her career progression because she had a vagina.

I believe this has been corrected in recent years (she makes more than I do, as a low-level corporate attorney), but we can't know for sure because THEY ARE PROHIBITED FROM TALKING WITH THEIR PEERS ABOUT SALARY AND BONUS.

Hmmm.

So your wife worked the same previous jobs, for the same amount of years, went to the same schools, got the same grades, etc. as these men?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

As usual, some rw's are just pretending the truth is a lie.

Like we didn't see that coming.

If its not true, why are the Rs fighting against it?






`

 

[Goodoledays]

Equal pay for equal work is already the law. If Barry's numbers are true (and there's no reason to believe this liar) then the law isn't working.

Hell, Obama himself first even obey the law. The women working for him make less than the men. He's not only a liar, he's a hypocrite.

And Ubamas dear Jay Carney said "At least its not as bad here". I bet he had his fingers crossed.