Who interrupts whom? https://t.co/Z6WR4HYpSy pic.twitter.com/eYQmmXQmMz
— David Schmitt (@PsychoSchmitt) March 10, 2018
Data worth noting
03 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, economics of crime, gender, law and economics, politics - USA
Not even unions can stop women choosing work-life balance over equal earnings @women_nz @JulieAnneGenter
03 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, gender, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice
From https://scholar.harvard.edu/bolotnyy/publications/why-do-women-earn-less-men-evidence-bus-and-train-operators-job-market-paper HT Marginal Revolution
The paper itself cannot be downloaded but clearly suggest they are detailed evidence on the work choices down to people nominating to rosters and taking up their roster nomination as a bus or train driver. This paper is therefore the only rival the Uber paper that found a zero gender pay gap once work-life balance choices were accounted for by women.
I agree
03 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, gender, labour economics, politics - Australia Tags: gender gap
My Problem With Mansplaining: Jonathan Pie
01 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, gender Tags: political correctness
Gender Pay equality debate gets heated
31 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, econometerics, economics of education, gender, health and safety, human capital, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice, poverty and inequality Tags: gender wage gap
Why does @women_nz @JulieAnneGenter treat men’s occupational choices as superior? Women choose more interactive occupations because of their vastly superior reading and verbal skills
28 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, economics of education, gender, human capital, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice, politics - New Zealand Tags: gender wage gap
Why next to no gender pay gap for British women under 40?
26 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, gender, labour economics
Source: Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) – Office for National Statistics
Steven Pinker Defends James Damore Against Dishonest Slanderer
23 Oct 2018 1 Comment
in discrimination, economics of education, gender, human capital, industrial organisation, labour economics, law and economics, occupational choice, politics - USA, survivor principle Tags: employment law, gender wage gap
Submission to Select Committee on Equal Pay Amendment Bill
21 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, economics of education, gender, human capital, industrial organisation, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice, politics - New Zealand
This submission is made up of 6 attachments because that is the maximum I could load.
Attachments 1 and 2 are the main part of submission and argue that pay equity is unfair to fair employers. An employer can hire and promote on merit, pay the going wage and still be successfully sued. Their name blackened forever. As a question of social justice, it is wrong to sue someone as a discriminating employer, when there is nothing they could do to right the supposedly wrong they were successfully sued. Barnardo’s can no longer compete with social workers because of the pay equity settlement in the public sector. It relies on donations and tendering for public contracts. It has no capacity to raise wages but could be successfully sued and driven out of business.
Attachments 3 to 5 explains that the gender pay gap is the result of the work-life balance choices of women interacting with some professions penalising an inability to work specific hours or long hours much more than. Pay equity will address none of these issues.
Attachment 6 explains how more than 40 years ago Solomon Polachek found that the gender pay gap was driven by factors such as the number and spacing of children. Employers cannot discriminate against women because they do not know this information and it is now unlawful to ask. It is a strange misogyny that employers hire single women on merit but have a bias against mothers who have several children whose birthdates on widely spaced apart.
To conclude this overview, as attachment 3 shows in a graphic, the gender pay gap for women at the bottom and middle of the labour market is barely 3-5%. It is rather odd to be offering 30% pay rises for a group of women whose pay gap with men at the bottom and middle of the labour market is not more than 5%. Clearly the comparable worth methodology misses something.
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments