Justice commissioner Viviane Reding says equality will take another 40 years without tough action
But Reding was adamant that there are plenty of women capable of challenging at the highest level. "It’s very interesting that the major business schools of Europe have united forces because they have seen that often the best MBAs are done by women, but the best positions after the MBA are taken by men. So the business schools decided to pool the talent which is available on the market – that means very qualified women who have a lot of management experience – in order to put this pool at the disposal of those who take the decisions on the fulfilling of the vacant positions on the board. Very often we have heard that the women are not available. They are," she said. "They are."
Reding praised the report published in February 2011 by Lord Davies on the same topic in the UK.
Harriet Harman, the feminist Minister for Women and Equality in the UK has been recommended by the Office Of National Statistics to present “gender wage gap” statistics differently in this report in order to give the figures in a fairer light. There is more evidence that her use of statistics are causing consternation in Whitehall. Previously to this, Ms. Harman has claimed that ”on average women are paid 22.6% per hour less than men”. However, this figure is based on total hours worked by both sexes – but does take into account the actual amount of hours worked by women.
From the Office Of National Statistics report (emphasis mine) ;-
The measure for all employees showed a pay difference of 22.5 percent in favour of men and the pay difference for full-timers was 12.8 per cent in April 2008. When looking at part-time employees, the difference was -3.5 per cent, meaning that part-time men were paid less on average than part-time women.
However, Ms. Harman’s own Equality and Human Rights Commission continues unabated with their own investigation on how best to provide the figures for public consumption.
Why not read the report and judge for yourself?
Wage gap is due to individual choices of men and women and to laws of supply and demand
Men choose to earn more, women choose to have more time and a better life. Never married women without children make choices like men, and thus earn more then men.
There is more demand for women engineering graduates, therefor they earn 115% of what men earn. The demand for women engineers is artificially greater due to fears of anti-discrimination lawsuits. Male models make 20% of what female models make, because there is not much demand for male models. Should affirmative action and "fair pay act" be applied to get equal pay for models and beauty contestants? Trash collectors (mainly male) make more then Wal-Mart sales persons (mainly female). It is not sexism, but supply and demand. Women tend to opt out of dangerous unpleasant jobs, long work hours, long commuting, moving to Alaska for job advancement, etc..
We may need legislation to help men to earn as much as women, when they make the same decisions.
Feminists seek equal (or more) pay for LESS HOURS AT EASIER JOBS.
YouTube comment by WhiteStar11111
Shocking. The entire European Union warps the system in favor of women, discriminating against men. What is interesting, Warren Farrell has debunked the wage gap myth in about 2007.
It is shocking how feminism somehow systematically misleads humanity. Can’t politicians read Warren Farrell? Or would anyone be able to disprove what he writes?
As has been said here, women don’t want to study and work like men in order to make as much as men. They want equality the easy way. Like in
- Tennis: equal prizes for less work, less hours and much less performance, ultimately leading to HIGHER prize money because women have time and energy to play in doubles
How is it possible that such outright fraud gets perpetrated by the highest political authorities? And they probably even believe it?
Can’t Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the European authorities READ Warren Farrell? Are they so brainwashed they believe what they do?
It is interesting to compare how academia commits fraud about domestic violence.
This is not off topic, because it shows how such fraud is being committed in academia. I suppose that in the wage gap myth similar methods of fraud must be used.
Obama’s inconsistencies: Can’t he understand statistics
Obama admin presses Senate to help end gender wage gap: Can’t he read statistics? All this has been debunked by Warren Farrell
During the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton repeatedly made the claim that women suffer from pay discrimination. Barack Obama’s website likewise asserted, "Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. Throughout his career, Barack Obama and Joe Biden have championed the right of women to receive equal pay for equal work."
It was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who engineered the recent passage of the Lilly Ledbetter Act. And just a few weeks ago Rep. George Miller of California made the red-meat assertion that women earn "78 cents for every dollar that is earned by a man doing the same job with the same responsibilities."
Democrats call it as the "gender wage gap," but I prefer to think of it as the "scare-the-female-electorate-into-submission" ploy.
Claims about sex-based wage discrimination have been repeated so often that many Americans simply accept them as fact. But a recently published — and quickly suppressed — study reveals a different picture.
Titled "An Analysis of Reasons for the Disparity in Wages Between Men and Women," the report tallies the results of over 50 studies. No one questions the fact that on average, men are paid more than women. But turns out this is an apples-to-oranges comparison.
The paper concludes the 20-cent odd wage difference is not caused by discrimination. Rather it’s women exercising their right to make lifestyle choices. What choices are we talking about?
1. A greater percentage of women chose to work part-time.
2. Women may opt to leave the work force for childbirth, child care, or elder care.
3. Women are often willing to accept a lower paying job in return for family-friendly policies that allow them to have fewer hours, flexible schedules, and a shorter commute.
In addition, women work fewer hours than men. According to an article posted on the Department of Labor website, "Among full-time workers, 24% of the men, compared to 10% of the women, usually worked more than 40 hours per week:" http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1984/06/art4full.pdf
And then the fact that men tend to work in occupations that are far more likely to injure, maim, or kill.
None of these are earth-shattering statements. But once again, liberal myth-mongering forced the government to commission a costly study to prove the obvious.
In its foreword, the Department of Labor concluded, "this study leads to the unambiguous conclusion that the differences in compensation of men and women are the result of a multitude of factors." The DoL added this parting comment: "the raw wage gap continues to be used in misleading ways to advance public policy agendas:" http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf
In other words, the so-called gender wage gap is yet another example of Ms. Information brazenly portrayed as fact by the mainstream media.
Obama himself discriminates
Based on these calculations, Obama’s 28 male staffers divided among themselves total payroll expenditures of $1,523,120. Thus, Obama’s average male employee earned $54,397.
Obama’s 30 female employees split $1,354,580 among themselves, or $45,152, on average.
Why this disparity? One reason may be the under-representation of women in Obama’s highest-compensated ranks. Among Obama’s five best-paid advisors, only one was a woman. Among his top 20, seven were women.
Again, on average, Obama’s female staffers earn just 83 cents for every dollar his male staffers make. This figure certainly exceeds the 77-cent threshold that Obama’s campaign website condemns. However, 83 cents do not equal $1. In spite of this 17-cent gap between Obama’s rhetoric and reality, he chose to chide GOP presidential contender John McCain on this issue.
Obama responded Aug. 31 to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin‘s Republican vice-presidential nomination. Palin "seems like a very engaging person," Obama told voters in Toledo, Ohio. "But I’ve got to say, she’s opposed — like John McCain is — to equal pay for equal work. That doesn’t make much sense to me."
Obama’s criticism notwithstanding, McCain’s payment patterns are the stuff of feminist dreams.
McCain’s 17 male staffers split $916,914, thus averaging $53,936. His 25 female employees divided $1,396,958 and averaged $55,878.
On average, according to these data, women in John McCain’s office make $1.04 for every dollar a man makes. In fact, all other things being equal, a typical female staffer could earn 21 cents more per dollar paid to her male counterpart — while adding $10,726 to her annual income — by leaving Barack Obama’s office and going to work for John McCain.
Maybe Obama can analyze why he himself picked mainly men. Maybe there were more qualified and overtime working men available on the labor market.
In 2009, President Obama signed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, which allows victims of pay discrimination to file a complaint with the government against their employer within 180 days of their last paycheck. Previously, victims were only allowed 180 days from the date of the first unfair paycheck. This Act is named after a former employee of Goodyear who alleged that she was paid 15-40 percent less than her male counterparts, which was later found to be accurate. President Obama has vowed to reduce the wage gap between the genders: women currently make approximately 80 cents for every dollar that men earn.
Women have made enormous progress in the workforce since the Equal Pay Act, but the stubborn fact remains that four-and-a-half decades later the basic goal of the act has not been realized. A History of Pay Inequity and the Equal Pay Act
More readings on the wage gap lie and why men are in the board room
Dr. Warren Farrell, the only man ever elected three times to the Board of the National Organization for Women in NYC, once asked, “If men are paid more for the same work, why would anyone hire a man?”
He may be sorry he asked. But during the years of research that followed, the answer evolved: Men earn more than women, but not for the same work—for 25 different workplace choices. Men’s choices lead to men earning more money; women’s choices lead to women having better lives.
Men’s trade-offs include working more hours (women typically work more at home); taking more-hazardous assignments (cab-driving; construction; trucking); moving overseas or to an undesirable location on-demand (women’s greater family obligations inhibit this); and training for more-technical jobs with less people contact (e.g., engineering).
Women’s choices appear more likely to involve a balance between work and the rest of life. Women are more likely to balance income with a desire for safety, fulfillment, potential for personal growth, flexibility and proximity-to-home. These lifestyle advantages lead to more people competing for these jobs and thus lower pay.
Only when Dr. Farrell’s research journey uncovered these 25 differences, did the “holy grail” become visible: women now earn more money for the same work—that is, women earn more when they work equal hours at the same job with the same size of responsibility for the same length of time with equal productivity, etc. The women’s movement can celebrate its greatest single triumph—exceeding its goal of equal pay for equal work. A triumph that frees women to enter the next level of progress…
Since men still earn more money, Why Men Earn More introduces to women the 25 ways to higher pay, showing which trade-offs lead to how much increase in pay, creating for women an opportunity to decide which trade-offs are worth it given her individual personality and current goals.
read more at summary of Warren Farrell: Why men earn more
How come that the facts were so distorted, and how do feminists manage to perpetuate the wrong myths 5 years after Warren Farrell clarified issues completely.
Still even Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama repeat the distorted misleading falsehoods. This causes women to be angry and feel discriminated. Unjustly, because Warren Farrell has clearly showed that in reality, women earn MORE for equal productivity, equal hours, equal qualifications. He believes that companies, and men are afraid to insist on the truth, for fear of being shamed and being attacked.
- Excerpts From Why Men Earn More
- Study Alleges Louisiana Has Largest Male-Female Wage Gap In U.S.
- Women do not Deserve Equal Pay
- What women can do to deserve equal pay
- Why the Gender Gap Won’t Go Away
Warren Farrell then takes aim at the dishonest depiction of the wage gap issue by the media. He cites one shrill headline that read, “Study of TV News Directors Finds Discrimination Against Women.” And it’s true that the female TV news directors were paid 27% less than the men.
But take a closer look, and it turns out the male directors had an average of 14.8 years of news work experience, while female directors had only 5.6 years. In other words, the men had almost three times more work experience, but were paid only about a quarter more.
This study of TV directors raises some lingering questions. First, why did the female directors have an average of 9.2 years less work experience than their male counterparts? And were qualified male candidates being passed over because of their sex? […]
Why Men Earn More presents information about beginning salaries for newly-minted college grads, broken down by their college major. In Table 5 we learn that women who major in computer programming, physics, agricultural engineering, or computer systems analysis receive substantially higher salary offers than men. By “substantial,” I mean men in these fields are paid $4,000 to $7,000 less in the first year alone. That’s a lot of pin money.
And in Table 6, we learn about the 10 occupations in which women with bachelor’s degrees receive starting offers that are at least 10% higher than men: Investment banking, portfolio management, urban planning, financial analysis, distribution, finance policy, fundraising, religious occupation, communications production, and dietetics.
For example, if you are a female dietician, your starting salary is $23,160. But your male counterpart is only offered $17,680 – a whopping 30% difference.
This information comes as a bombshell. Unequal Pay for Equal Work?
Why men earn more The startling truth behind the pay gap
(Warren Farrell at the Cato Institute)