Slashdot Mirror
Female Computer Programmers Make $0.72 For Every Dollar Made By Male: Study (siliconbeat.com)
An anonymous reader cites an article on The Mercury News' Silicon Beat tech blog: Female computer programmers make 72 cents for every dollar earned by male programmers. That difference is after researchers adjust for factors such as age, education, years of experience, job title, employer and location, according to a new study by Glassdoor (PDF), the jobs and recruiting marketplace, which looked at salary data of more than 500,000 people over 140 professions. The well-known U.S. wage gender gap is 76 cents for every dollar men earn. But women earn 94.6 cents for every man's dollar after adjusting for all factors other than gender. In other words, the wage gap in the U.S. is about 5.4 percent.
No wonder it was submitted by anonymous.
Maybe men are better at negotiating salary. Negotiating makes a huge difference. When I was promoted at my last job, I did not negotiating because I was afraid I wouldn't be given the job. The person (a lady) who was promoted next did negotiate and started about 5 thousand more than me.
I'd be interested to see what the starting offer was for men and woman and what disparity was there.
So they're overpaid?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
When the first line of the "report" is:
'It is a well established fact that men and women are paid unequally.'
Is it any wonder that their "research" finds that men and women are paid equally?
Are you saying women earn less than a quarter of what mean earn?
Let me put it another way: that is what you're saying, but is it what you meant?
At the bottom of the
If I, as a business owner, can save 28% salary costs on my employees by exclusively hiring women, why would I *ever* hire a man? If women are equal in performance and skill, there is no reason for me to hire men.
Except competence and productivity.
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
In that case, this is a true statement:
If women are as productive as men, then companies hire women like crazy and thereby drive men out of the industry.
That means the contrapositive is true:
If it is not the case that companies hire women like crazy and thereby drive men out of the industry, then it is not the case that women are as productive as men.
and the HB1 makes 0.60 + 60-80 hours a week
When employees encounter Glassdoor, they are given a limited preview of the site’s full content. To gain complete access, users are encouraged to contribute to the Glassdoor community by submitting an anonymous salary, company review, interview review, benefits review or company photo. In this way, users “give” content to the online community to “get” access to job information provided by others.
And that's being generous.
If one could get equal work by paying $0.72 instead of $1.00, then the cubicles of America (and the world) would be filled with women programmers.
And the relevant bit missing from the normalization: freelancers vs. corporate drones.
Or you are looking at a massive lawsuit to come.
Bill Clinton, is that you? Jealous of Trump's hot wife are ya?
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
That is true. But these kind of reports always fail to explain WHY this continues to happen.
The quiet truth is that a large number of women benefit TREMEDOUSLY from the current set up.
If you area straight woman who follow the traditional cultural model - who takes years off her career to raise a child, while married to an older man, than those woman benefit HUGELY from the current system. (x-14% salary at age 30, after 5 year's off to raise a kid is WELL worth it if you are married to a man that that makes x+14% at age 40, no time off)
The prevalence of this tradition - and the constant admiration of it by our cultural - is why women still get paid less.
Gay women suffer the most from out system, and gay men benefit the most. Never married women come out the 2nd worst, never married men come out the 2nd best.
If you want to end the pay difference, you have to encourage woman to marry YOUNGER men then them. Once that happens, boom, the pay gap will vanish.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
If this is really true, and I suspect it is not, why would anyone hire male programmers? It makes no sense economically to pay ~25% more for labor if all else is equal.
Not one of these "77 cents on the dollar" studies again?
How difficult is it to understand that you need to factor in things like job tasks, education, experience, hours, etc. before you can actually say that someone is earning more or less for the same job? Someone who works for 50+ hours a week with a university degree and over a decade of experience doing highly specialized work is naturally going to earn more than a web dev who just graduated from a code "bootcamp" and doesn't work any more than 40 hours a week. We've had plenty of studies, including the annual Stackoverflow user survey, showing us that the average female programmer is much newer to the job than the average male programmer. To expect pay parity with this kind of background is completely stupid.
"The well-known U.S. wage gender gap is 76 cents for every dollar men earn." No, it's been disproven. Over and over again. Stop posting this incorrect crap.
Gender has nothing to do with sexual organs. One doesn't need a penis to be a male and make equal pay.
I really would like to hire more women in IT and have made a point of bringing in women candidates for every hire we do. I have had a lot of success in non-programming, but I have found only a few women programmers who were worth hiring. Every time that I do I have actually offered a premium because HR wants diversity and having all males makes us look bad. Every time I make an offer to a programmer, I find I get outbid to the point that I cannot make an equal counteroffer. My only assumption is that other companies are in the same boat but have more leeway on what they can offer.
So the reality from my point of view is that a competent female developer will make MORE than the equally competent male developer.
After you account for years of education, years of experience, and hours worked women make about 93 cents for every dollar men earn. That's the actual truth but it's not as sensational as the Bullshit parroted by the media.
The first 2 sentences of the article are:
Female computer programmers make 72 cents for every dollar earned by male programmers. That difference is after researchers adjust for factors such as age, education, years of experience, job title, employer and location
But then the rest of the article disagrees completely:
For every dollar a man in this role earns, this is how much a woman makes:
Game Artist – $0.84
Information Security Specialist – $0.85
Data Specialist – $0.76
Software Architect – $0.89
SEO Strategist – $0.90
Front End Engineer – $0.90
Database Engineer – $0.90
Sharepoint Developer – $0.91
SAP Developer – $0.92
On the upside, two professions in great demand show women doing at or better than the national average:
Software Engineer – $0.94
Mobile Developer – $0.97
I suspect the first sentence should say "That difference is before researchers adjust..." Going further, and reading the linked GlassDoor PDF, I can't even find a 72 cent number in there. So I'm totally confused as to how they got that introduction. Can anyone else make sense of this?
The headline is blatantly false. As the actual paper notes:
However, comparing workers with similar age, education and years of experience shrinks that gap to 19.2 percent. Further, comparing workers with
the same job title, employer and location, the gender pay gap in the U.S. falls to 5.4 percent (94.6 cents per dollar)
So the actual gap is only 5.4%, if the adjustments are being done are accurate.
Moreover, overt gender discrimination is not the cause, according to the analysis:
Workplace fairness and anti-discrimination remain important issues. But the data show that while overt forms of bias may be a partial cause of the gender pay gap, they are not likely the main driver. Instead, occupation and industry sorting of men and women into systematically different jobs is the main cause. Public policies that help remove social barriers to allow for equality in occupational choices can help shrink the gender pay gap. This includes policies that alleviate social pressures that divert men and women into different college majors and career tracks, and that burden women with a disproportionate share of the responsibility for child-care and elderly caregiving duties.
So this analysis, if true (a gigantic if), is actually cause for celebration. Techies are not the misogynists that outside elements are trying to paint them as and most of the causes appear to be external to the tech industry.
But that wage gap in the summary does NOT account for whether or not it's in a field with more women. Remember that study posted here not too long ago that tracked changes in pay as more women entered certain fields? The wage gap could be zero after accounting for "all other factors," but if we don't value "women's work," women will still be paid less.
Before the standard slashdot war on women starts (usually has some jackass saying the word "social justice warrior"), can I ask an honest question:
Is this broken down by H1B? Just asking, because we only have a few female devs here, about twice as many US-born devs and a metric shitton of overpaid H1Bs.
Business owners and executives are fucking scumbags.
There is NO LEGITIMATE REASON other than these assholes love being assholes.
But then they also dont pay programmers honest pay rates either.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
"Further, comparing workers with the same job title, employer and location, the gender pay gap in the U.S. falls to 5.4 percent (94.6 cents per dollar)."
Oddly enough, while they adjust for "everything," they don't mention things like:
Maternity leave
Taking time off to pick up kids after school
(Men often do these sorts of things, but be realistic - women take more time off to handle their families)
They also include "years of experience," but they don't allow for "years of experience with gaps due to taking time off for family."
The study compares a lot of different things, and boils it down to "amount paid in base salary." But they leave out the most important part: "hours actually worked." While this doesn't directly affect base pay, it affects small pay differences because the employer knows that the male employee will end up working more - and more consistent - hours. Thus the less-than six-percent difference.
This was discussed in other articles. Only a few hundred people call themselves "computer programmers" anymore, according to glassdoor. These are likely mainframers. So there could be bias among this small group. Of course we don't have an unbiased sample of data, only a sample from people motivated to post their salary to glassdoor. But still, there could be some bias here. It's not among all developers though, it's among the small subset that call themselves "computer programmers" for whatever reason.
The survey accounts for exactly that.
It must be really frustrating to see misogyny everywhere it doesn't exist. Not every attack on your position is misogyny just as any disagreement by a white person is racism or any criticism of the US is "america bashing".
Arguments must stand on their own merits. Conclusions must be supported by data and it must account for obvious concerns such as inherent disparity between groups you are comparing (women give birth, for example. Men do not). If you just get defensive and yell misogyny every time you're confronted with someone who disagrees with you and start arguing with strawmen, all you're doing is signalling that you are not entirely stable and probably not someone anyone would want to employ.
I'm sure they'd make more. I know I make more per hour than my male coworkers because they stay every night till past 9pm while I always leave before 6pm. Also, I don't usually work weekends. I work about fifty-five hours a week while most of my developer coworkers do Seattle "hundreds." That's 16 hours per day Mon-Thu and then 12 hours per day Thu-Sun.
Again, I, and every other female I know that programs, makes more per hour than my male coworkers.
Mod parent up. The risks of giving a woman of child bearing age range an important role in a software project are huge. It's not like you can just hire a temp. A 25% pay cut to compensate for that risk seems generous.
Transparency in pay. Your prejudice is showing. Regardless, if the gap remaining has no clear cause, then taking any action based on this data is pointless. Also I don't see any margins of error listed in the main doc or the appendix. That could easily erase whatever gap if I assume the level of rigor put into this data and analysis is as mediocre as the attempt to tout their (potentially completely unnecessary) solutions. I don't necessarily have a problem with a company having transparency in pay. But that won't solve ACTUAL gender bias. It MAY be one way to expose it, but there isn't even a reasonable hypothesis to create based on the complete lack of conclusive evidence that gender bias plays any part in the gap.
The shortage of women among chess Grand Masters (GMs — players with rating above 2500) is so obvious, a new title (WGM) had to be created just for them — a woman needs only 2300 to qualify. With the individual chess ratings computed by the same open formulas for all, it can not be explained by sexism or other social injustices.
Whether the discrepancy is due to nature (such as hormonal differences affecting brain) or nurture (parents and society treating girls differently), the differences in pay are probably due to the same reason(s).
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
As usual, this will be full of misandrist comments...
Almost always a pay gap is reflective of capability and/or performance.
Real life is NOT the gravy train as the public sector generally is.
ake time off to have babies, spend a couple of years raising them, then come back to work expecting to be paid as if you never left
Actually if they get paid as if they never left, in most companies their salaries would be between 4-10% behind their peers for a couple years alone, depending on their performance level. Everyone else was getting yearly raises.
So what they should do is take a couple years off, come back to their current employer at the same pay, and find a new one at a higher pay, then either get the boss to give them a raise or jump ship.
A woman who worked for 2 years, took a year off with her baby and worked 2 more years has as much experience as a man who worked for 4 years. They are not equal.
There is a lot of garbage in the glassdoor data. I personally always inflate my salary when I report it to 'help' HR realize they need to pay programmers more. In any case, here is some better data:
Women make more than men in some tech jobs.
Overall in tech, men make as much as women.
Another study, women are paid as much as men after graduation, and tech is one of the most equal fields to go into (see page 17). And I believe it. You want to see sexual harassment? Look at the sales team, not the programming team.
These sorts of stories are harmful, because they make women say, "I shouldn't go into tech, look how bad it is!" Then they do something mis-informed, like go into sales.
If you want to know what it's really like for a woman in tech, here is a good blog post. It's a great field for women.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I guess many prefer to pay by the pound. If you look at it this way the women are actually overpaid as they are clearly more than 30% smaller than the average male programmer... ;-)
Yeah, things would be so very much simpler if wifey just stayed home, barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen.
I guess the 'barefoot' part is optional for you progressives.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
When these articles inevitably get filled with posts about how women don't work as hard and spend too much time on maternity leave, that is actually misogyny. The reported wage gap in the summary may well be misleading. But there are also inherent biases that show up in the comments. When you complain that data aren't used to back up conclusions, the statements that women don't work as hard are anecdotal, yet they get modded up as insightful. It seems like you and so many others here just can't handle the truth. With respect to maternity leave, trends in American industry are toward allowing men paternity leave that's equal to the maternity leave women receive. Netflix is already doing this, and others will surely follow. Therefore, any complaints about that are on their way to being completely invalid.
While the submission focuses on salaries and compensation within the corporate sector, what about the total lack of diversity we see within some notable open source projects?
Take the Rust programming language, for example. Despite its community having an intense focus on diversity and tolerance, and despite the project having one of the most stringent code of conducts around, and despite the project even having a Moderation Team to stamp out perceived injustice, why do we see so little diversity among Rust's contributors?
The extreme homogeneity of the Rust community is the exact opposite of what we'd expect, given how much effort and focus they put on diversity. We'd expect to see around half of the participants being women. We'd expect to see much more racial diversity. Yet we don't see any of that, and instead see severe uniformity.
Why do we see so little diversity among the Rust contributors?
This is a terrible summary, though in this case the fault lies with Glassdoor's summary of their own data, rather than slashdot.
If you look at the details in the appendix, you'll see that their sample size for the "Computer Programmer" title was only 138, as compared to 2330 "Software Architects", 3525 "Front-end Engineers", 13461 "Software Engineers", 2199 "Programmer Developers", etc. All of those other job categories had much lower gender pay gaps in the 4-6% range. That's still too large, but it's much better than 28%.
So what really happened here was that the report analyzed based on self-reported job titles and it so happened that a very rarely-used title, computer programmer, with a small sample size, just happened to have an extreme gender pay difference. Personally, I wonder what kind of company calls their people "computer programmers". In my 25 year career I've had a variety of titles, including "Software developer", "Software engineer", "Software architect", "I/T specialist", "I/T architect", "Software team lead", etc. with various other tags attached like "junior", "senior", "consulting" and so on. I have never, ever had "computer programmer" as my official title, and never known anyone else with that title either.
'Nuff said
Survey says... Bullshit!
Speaking from personal experience, my penis makes me a MUCH more productive programmer. I can count to 11, while female programmers can only count to 10!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Let's start by stating something that will offend some, but should not be discounted statistically or scientifically:
The majority of female programmers *may* not be as good as the majority of male programmers. (Note the term majority, and please don't respond with granular data, personal stories or examples which display your lack of understanding of statistical terms like "majority".)
The easily offended PC crowd has no doubt already stopped reading and are modding me down for such heresy.
While the suggestion that men might be better at some things than women (spatial relationships -- as is scientifically proven, for example), and vice versa, the suggestion that science be applied to sensitive areas like gender equality in particular industries runs counter to the prevailing ideology of the day. Political correctness mandates that men and women must be equal at all things including armed combat.
Nevertheless, the idea that men may be better coders than women should not be discounted on ideological grounds. Because when we start operating on ideology alone, then statistics become irrelevant. And if statistics are irrelevant, we should all stop reading this page because the entire thesis of the OP rests on the statistical claim that women are paid less than men for the same work.
So are statistics relevant or not?
If so, then let's address this statistically:
Women statistically aren't interested in coding relative to males. Statistically.
Women statistically aren't particularly interested in STEM relative to males. Statistically.
Women statistically aren't as good at math. Statistically. (Just Google the gender gap on Math SAT's. It's profound).
You can craft all the cultural explanations you want -- and they may or may not be valid -- but that doesn't change the statistics.
So the question I have is simple: At what point (if ever) do we question the ideology that says women are as good at coding as men?
Ever?
Do we ever get to apply science, statistics and logic to this question? Or must we accept the ideology and abandon evidence -- which leads us to an inescapable and obviously unfounded conclusion that women are underpaid?
The quality of /. commenters has gone down as a lot of the insightful users fled. But yeah, many of the software realms have some serious social/misogyny issues. I advise female programmers to strongly consider jobs either with the government or contracting for the government. You may end up working with a whole bunch of people who are older than you, married with families, but there's a lot of effort to cut out social drama, and just have everyone focus on getting the job done.
Most developers agree that older workers are discriminated against, so why is it so hard to believe that females are discriminated against.
On the other hand, if women choose jobs that are less demanding to have a better work/life balance, is there anything wrong with them getting paid less? If I was told I could make 20% more by working at a job that made me work 30% longer hours or with an increased commute (my current commute is from my bed to my home office). I would turn it down.
As a man, can I take off for a few years to raise a child and expect to compete in salary against someone else that did not?
If so, where do I sign for that Privilege!!?
Source is not a peer reviewed study. Without independent verification, this publication is no more significant than creationist "science".
Hot? If the A/C failed her face would melt.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
They all look alike in the dark...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Women are being oppressed zomg!
~Hillary
The risks of giving a woman of child bearing age range an important role in a software project are huge. It's not like you can just hire a temp. A 25% pay cut to compensate for that risk seems generous.
It's not like women give their employers two weeks' notice as soon as they find out that they're pregnant. If the employer knows six months in advance, and they still can't figure out how to handle the situation, then they're a disorganized mess that most people would probably hate to work for anyway.
And some people will actually read the study and do an analysis. That is why Slashdot is worth visiting, because some people actually read the study.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
That was his point. He was playing the part of a person so conservative that they would think that merely allowing a woman to wear shoes is wildly progressive.
Taking time off to pick up kids after school
(Men often do these sorts of things, but be realistic - women take more time off to handle their families)
I have a friend that's a director in software development that has to deal with the discrepancy in work-life balance between his male employees. Bob complains that Charles is paid more, given more responsibility, and is doing better career-wise because Charles doesn't have a family and commits more time to the company vis-a-vis nights and weekends. Bob and Charles are both skilled individuals, but the fact is that Charles contributes more to the company and is compensated for it.
Sure. 2 years in IT + 2 years in construction = 4 years in IT. Makes sense.
At some companies, yes. Netflix is allowing paternity leave that's equal to the maternity leave allowed to women. Paternity leave is becoming increasingly common. It's reasonable to want equal rights in that area, and this is on its way to happening. If it's reasonable for you to want paternity leave, why shouldn't it be reasonable for women to expect equal wages for doing the same job with the same level of skill?
Learn to negotiate.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Being out of the industry for two years sets a person back. Stuff changes.
As a hiring manager, I would generally be more interested in a candidate who had worked continuously for the past two years and is currently working than someone who had taken the last two years off and worked continuously for the previous two years. "Interested" means I'm more likely to make them a job offer (as, perhaps are others which gives them a stronger negotiating position due to multiple offers) and more likely to give them a higher offer. Even if both people were to be identical performers after joining, it would take a few years to erase the gap in their initial offers (as raise pools being finite so I have to rob Peter to pay Paul).
It is a shame that these female programmers are not better and able to keep up with their male counterparts. I blame the educators who pushed them into programming in the first place.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
comparing workers with similar age, education and years of experience shrinks that gap to 19.2 percent. Further, comparing workers with the same job title, employer and location, the gender pay gap in the U.S. falls to 5.4 percent
The report covers employment outside the US as well, and provides workable solutions to close that final 5.4% gap;
A large number of academic studies find salary transparency can help eliminate male-female pay differences. For example, a 2012 study by economists Andreas Leibbrandt and John List found that a major contributor to the gender pay gap is a negotiation gap. Women are less likely to negotiate over salary than men. But when researchers explicitly told job seekers that pay was negotiable, the gender gap disappeared.
...Honestly, I'm pretty sure you can in the world of programming. At most, it's just a matter of knowing how to negotiate. If you have 4 years experience, take off for two years. You should be able to get hired at the same rate as anyone new to a company with 4 years experience; meaning, what you were making before + market adjustment for demand of labor + cost of living increases over those two years.
Programmers make $0.75 US dollar for every Canadian dollar they earn.
The company is buying tampons every 28cents an hour while the guys get their porn for free!
Anything that increases the average tenure of a candidate will generally reduce their attractiveness to an employer - and hence how eager (read, "How much they will pay") the employer is to hire them.
One of the tasks that most managers spend a lot of time on and tend to dislike is hiring. Hiring also takes individual contributors time in the interview process. Once hired, a new hire is less productive initially due to not knowing the environment and the product as well as an equivalently capable person who has been in the environment for a year. A new hire also consumes more resources from existing individual contributor for training/mentoring.
As well there is the maternity leave cost issue (which varies by state I believe) and the phenomena of a women leaving with the stated intent of coming back after leave (so you, as the hiring manager, don't get a new hire to replace her) and then that phone call comes saying "I'm sorry, but I just can't bring myself to leave my precious little bundle of drool, vomit, and poop so I won't be coming back" -- which then creates an immediate hiring need that you couldn't prepare for.
A project's schedule/quality/function never benefits from a productive member of the team leaving no matter how well managed the program is. The amount of that impact will, of course, be less in a well managed program.
It may be that women who are spawning tend to stay longer at their jobs than men which could compensate, or even overcompensate, for these problems. However, I don't recall seeing a relevant study on that and my personal experience is that there isn't much difference in "non spawning" tenure but my sample set is too small to draw conclusions from.
That was a silly thing to write. "Social awkwardness" is most definitely a box I checked in my last long-form census. The 'why' is very clear: fewer women trained in CS or IT. That's it.
A "study" by an SJW advocacy group. Why does anyone even pay attention?
I believe that if you really want to look at the 'wage gap', you need to consider only the following factors
1) Gender (obviously)
2) Salary (either monthly, or hourly)
3) Position
I do not think you should look at amount of time worked, because that can greatly shrink (leave of absenses) or expand (overtime) a persons annual take home pay. We know that women on average tend to take more time off, and men on average tend to work more overtime. You have to factor that out.
I also think obviously you cannot consider taxes, which is why you look at Salary and not take home pay, since tax regimes and tax breaks differ vastly based on region and personal circumstances.
We also know that men tend to do better at negotiating pay, and this could be where the problem lies, and would be taken into account in my analysis. This could be easily taken care of simply by not allowing pay negotiations, this is what unions have typically done to try and make things fair.
Simply put, at my work place, there is no wage gap. We all get paid exactly the same salary, based solely on position. It's mandated in our contract. There is no negotiating for salary (I'm in a union shop, but I'm not arguing for unionization, it has it's drawbacks too).
There is however a very strong gender gap by position at my work place. We have far more male developers than female developers, and far more female BA's than male BA's. Maybe men and women are naturally attracted to different work roles. Do we need to fix that? Not sure. Certainly any type of quota system leaves a bad taste in my mouth, since you may not get the best person for the job in a quota system.
Heck NO! I pay for the best slippers, so my wife's feet are comfortable -- she won't wear shoes in the house. Sadly, it looks like childbearing is no longer possible - we were trying for another - but now we foster. And while she cooks a fine meal, she too busy homeschooling, babysitting, gardening and taking care of the animals to stay in the kitchen too long.
HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
Honestly, a company could replace it's IT department with women to reduce costs instead of out-shoring to india..
0.72 out of every dollar a male makes goes to a female. That's what the title says, isn't it.
I agree on your definition of mysogyny... except these posts don't explain the statistics they discuss... they're just opinions and should be treated as such.
You clearly haven't worked for many governments.
Actually it's a stereotype of (American) conservatives who want wives to stay at home and be simpleton breeders.
See comment title.
What is this, SJW Thursday now?
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I wager, if you look at "hours worked", it all changes.
I wager men do far more overtime hours on salary than women do. I rarely see women work overtime or stay until 9pm or later at night. When I do, it is almost exclusively men.
In most cases they find the gap to be less than 5%, which makes me wonder what the error margin is, and whether they excluded any results which showed a reverse pay gap.
Knowing several working moms the general sentiment is that they would prefer to be home even if it meant being barefoot. Most have lamented not being able to stay home until the youngest was at least in grade school. This is also found in the research where women will take more time for family in exchange for reduced pay on average.
I did not negotiating because I was afraid I wouldn't be given the job
I think you're perfect for the job -- as long as it doesn't involve conjugating verbs.
Indian programmers only make 27 cents for every dollar. Won't someone think of the Indians?!?!?!?!?
From the study:
Unlike traditional labor market surveys, Glassdoor salary data are not collected through the use of a probability sample of a representative sample of workers. Instead, Glassdoor collects data via a decentralized “crowd-sourcing” platform, using a process known as a “give to get” model.
It might as well be a Slashdot poll.
I wonder if they adjusted for how many times the men have to come over and write code for them because the men had obsessed over their craft since age 14 and the women learned how to program for a career in college and don't really care about it. Say what you want, and there are always exceptions, but I'm speaking from experience.
How come they never control for the number of hours actually worked? So many studies have published that male programmers work longer hours, you'd think wage studies would control for hours actually worked.
Women are more likely to get pregnant and leave the workforce for years at a time. I know it's shocking, but I looked at the data. Men just never seem to get pregnant - at least in the STEM fields.
On top of their *existing* salaries?!?!
That's *so* totally frigging unfair!
First I was going to downmod you, then I was going to flame you, but you actually make some kind of point in the most crass and misogynist way possible.
See, here's the problem. We have an article that says that software engineers and mobile developers have almost reached pay parity. This is great news! Listen up, women, you don't want to be a video game artist and only get paid 85 cents on the dollar, you want to be in software engineering and development! Right? Right?
For some reason we have a headline that plays on the long discredited 75-ish cent pay gap between men and women. This is nothing more than a flamebait/clickbait article and yet another attack on all assigned males who went into programming careers.
Really, the only useful way to use the often-cited ammunition that's supposed to make all assigned males FEEL GUILTY that women make 75 cents on the dollar is in a sociological sense. I can't seem to find it anymore (pretty sure I found the correct AVFM article but the links were all mysteriously broken), but level of education is a pretty good predictor of the amount of a "gender gap" that women will face. Women who have a college education will find themselves making roughly what their male counterparts are making. (I'm also failing to find an article that I think was posted to this site a while ago that women pay women less than men pay women.) Women who only have a high school education have a huge pay gap.
This is fairly easy to explain. If you were assigned the male gender at birth and you only have a high school education, you're still going to need to make money if you want to raise a family. You might become a truck driver or a plumber or learn how to weld. If you're a cisfemale and you only have a high school education, the state will provide for you. All the state asks is that you find a minimum wage job somewhere. Plus, cisfemales believe that their husbands should make more than them and are fundamentally uncomfortable with the other way around. A cisfemale who wants to use her animal functions as her sole contribution to society has no reason to seek anything over minimum wage.
So, what you wish you would have said is that women who have no interest in a career and would rather be mothers first don't seek jobs that pay as much.
They have to replace her with a temp. Never easy. She's entitled to her job back.
Also a significant % of women don't ever return from their family leave. But they don't 'change their minds' until the financial bene is over. Often less than 2 weeks notice.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
How much % increase does she deserve for her new nose and butt wiping experience? Assuming she is in STEM.
She might be due a COLA, but she might also have forgotten everything she knew about computers.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Total darkness fixes a lot. But Hillary? No.
She would not shut up and let you call her another name.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The data they are using is highly suspect. Many people to go review sites like Glassdoor and Yelp to complain about a company, not to sing its accolades. I don't think it takes a vivid imagination to see that many people may under report their salaries so that the company looks worse to future potential job seekers.
If this were true I could have just hired super smart women and saved 25% on salary costs. I could crush all competition inside and outside my company, but nobody is doing that because the wage gap for skilled people is not even close to a 25% difference. No business would arbitrarily pay men (or anyone) extra just because. Salaries would balance themselves out due to competition. Take a look at outsourcing, we have outsourced for jobs to save to save about 20% to 30%. If I only knew I could have pointed our company towards smart women from the US who spoke English.
People are paid whatever they can get(free market), it is not the males fault that females get paid less or more. I am a male and I have reported to female bosses. I really don't care what my co-workers, male or female, make as long as I'm not picking up their slack. These reports are nothing more than FUD.
All of my career I have worked closely with accountants - that's the interesting story. Experienced women train in the incoming rookie male who always end up being her boss. Do a report on that, talk about a good ol boys network.
These studies keep coming out but they all miss an important distinction: pay gap versus earnings gap
The PAY gap, which is currency paid per unit-hour, does not exist. It is illegal to pay vaginaz less than penisez for the same work. It doesn't happen - otherwise we'd see masses of lawsuits. If it did exist then companies would hire masses of lower paid vaginaz and all the penisez would be out of work (and they'd reap colossal profits as a result). It doesn't happen, because the PAY GAP doesn't actually exist. It is a FALSE meme that is deliberately propagated by those that don;t know the difference between earnings and wages/salaries.
The EARNINGS gap is real, and is at the rate stated in the study. This is the integral of currency over a career. This difference is for numerous reasons, which the good folk of Slashdot have already covered. However, this does not indicate inequity between vaginaz and penisez - simply different life choices, different job preferences, different amounts of time worked.
So, the 'wage gap' is mythical. There is no Pay Gap but there is an Earnings Gap which is perfectly explainable. However, those pushing the myth clearly do not understand the difference between pay and earnings, or don't want to know - because they can use it as guilt tactics for obtaining better positions in desirable fields (executive positions, professional positions) or higher pay rates to 'compensate' - as well as the contemptible practice of emotional blackmailing to bludgeoning penisez into submission.
There is one important point though. Motherhood is a major source of the earnings gap, as well as critical to our society (especially in the Ponzi-scheme welfare state that requires pyramid demographics and unpaid mothers are required to fill the base of the pyramid - or you end up with economically catastrophic demographics like Greece and Japan [although fewer people are good for the environment, so it's not all downside]). Since the purpose of life is to propagate life, families are very important and most families/mothers could use more support - but our economic system doesn't account well for this.
ps. for those affronted by my use of "vaginaz" and "penisez", tough! I'm affronted by these SJW gender-war myths that are counter-factual and are intended to divide the penisez from the vaginaz and set them at odds so that people can divide and rule (as well as extort money via counter-factual myths like the 'wage gap'). I use these words so that you can understand that pro-family Slashdotters are even more affronted by your deliberate divisive use of false memes than you are of my choice of words. Stop dividing men from women. Stop using falsehoods to cause rancor in the workplace. Normal humans are sick of it !
Women simply aren't in the office as much.
Given the highly social, highly peer entangled corporate work environment (particularly as I see software jobs, looking in from the outside), she might actually have been able to learn more about computers in those two years wiping butts than her working counterparts who merely put in 40-45 hours a week in the corporate longship, if she merely invested one hour a day reading or doing self-directed technical work. That's a real figure based on my time at a few top 10 tech companies.
Of course she will fall behind that of the single, 80-hour a week employee who does the social thing at work and then goes home to do the real work. But so do most married men, unless their wives are able to stay at home to support their husbands career. This is a real problem in technology as far as I'm concerned, most of us work an unsustainable number of hours.
If this were true, every employer would start seeking out female programmers as a way to save money. Women's salaries would immediately increase due to the increase in demand, and the situation would fix itself overnight.
Here we go again...the 'well known wage gap is 76 cents'...I don't CARE how 'well known' this number is...its WRONG & as such should NEVER, EVER be reported again...ever.
Businesses should be able to fire female employees that get pregnant. It's her own fault that she can't show up for work and hiring temporary workers is a massive pain in the ass.
I think people should be paid by skill level, not by what they are programming; whether you're a mobile programmer, an IoT programmer, or even a female programmer.
Cut out the 'social drama'? Seriously, that's what women DO...men, even nerds/geeks, do not deal in 'social drama'...in fact this is 1 of the issues that feminists complain about the most...e.g. nerds/geeks don't treat women any different than other men which apparently causes hurt feelings or the idea that the men aren't giving women 'a chance'.. or are being 'too aggressive' or other bullshit that men don't care or complain about....
and often take advantage of their sex to get ahead ... of course, it's ok if they promote other women unfairly in order to "get even"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4uX3ekK7Yw
But what if the male project lead has a child and takes paternity leave? Or the wife moves across country and the male workers decides to follow? Your thinking is stuck in the 50s if you think only women have to deal with children and only men make family decisions.
statistical disingenuousness abounds these days. i had to dig to find this number. those publishing this sort of study should include accuracy information up front.
Paternity leave is a thing now too, even in the US.
Maths, Physics, and FORTRAN.
- The Simpsons.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
It isn't even Friday.
Lots of speculation here in social issues so I'll just take a stab at the possibility there's a technical issue. When I program I have to get into a fugue zone. I have a picture in my head of the whole landscape of the program not just the few lines on the file on screen. That is I'm really visualizing it. It's really a landscape. And there's some reason to think that due to our hunter ancestors that makes _May_ be better at navigating landscapes.
Other studies show that women also check out and checkin differently. Women coders tend to work on larger tasks that are less urgent such as refactoring code rather than bringing up a system quickly. The latter is frequently more financially impactful though we all thank goodness for the dedicated souls that refactor things in the end.
Thus my guess is women pick problems they are good at just like men do and if those are different areas they might get paid differently too or at least get promoted differently.
Finally as demonstrated by trump being hostile works well as a male strategy but not a female one. Perhaps there are fewer women who can manage makes as there are males. Everyone already knows that make dominated environments are hostile to women.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Wasn't this topic already settled? Generally speaking men are risk takers and will walk away if the offer is not good enough whereas women are more interested in longer term stability. Also if you don't compare men and women who refused offers you are just getting half the picture and counting different types of people, those who settled for the first offer and those who risked everything and got a better offer. You are not even counting the ones who walked away so the males that you do count are the more highly paid ones. i.e. As others have pointed out, better negotiators get better rewards by risking everything.
In this age of "positive discrimination" (ugh how I dislike that concept!) women should not be grateful for job offers, they should count on that role being held for a female anyway and take more risks when negotiating.
If true I'd start a company that hired out female programmers. I could pay them 85 cents on the dollar, charge my clients 90 cents on the dollar and keep the other 10 cents. The women would make 10 cents more, the companies would save on programmers and I would make a small profit. It's just bullshit.
Is there a weekly quota for this SJW bullshit on /.!?
Themselves and conclude all 156 PHD's in the study have wrong.
While there trickle down grand plan killed off 30 percent of middle class
These two numbers have something in common.
bash_history
Because bash_history is reliable and secure.
I'll watch system load and graph it against baselines, watch your deploys and graph it against the last X times you did it
Because your shitty ass code isn't the problem.
I'll pull git history to prove bugs didn't come from development.
Okay.
I'll use reproducible build processes to prove you injected something *after* we approved it.
Code monkey bitches don't approve things, nor do they control build processes.
I'll monitor LDAP and spot you doing something at odd hours when it's not part of your behavior profile.
Sure you will. "SIR!" you say, cum leaking from your nostrils, "IT SAYS HERE HE LOGGED IN AT 2 PM!"
240K ... Rockstar
The fact that you even used that word means you don't make more than $50k a year.
Keep dreaming you aren't playing at amateur hour, punk ass bitch.
You could call it management (or leadership) training in some sectors.
That group of bovine standing over there appears quite portentous. That's right it's an ominous cow herd.
Look on the bright side: some of us make $1.39 for every dollar we might have otherwise made. If this doesn't show that Man is progressing, I don't know what does!
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
72 c in the dollar for something generally inferior.
We all know it. Not tarring all females, but everyone knows it.
Seriously this 'well known' pay gap bullshit has been dispensed with many times already & this study doesn't nothing to change that except demonstrate once again that if you cherry pick your data you can get any result or confirm any bias you want.
Women are not 'severely' underpaid (if they are at all given the level of statistical noise in the analysis I've read) vs men when 'all other factors other than gender' are considered. If women what they same pay as men they simply need to make the same life choices as men, if they don't like those choices don't go arguing with the government &/or employers to change things to support the choices YOU want to make (have babies, stay at home with them for a period of time etc.). I don't want those things & as such they don't benefit me 1 iota & only hurt my chances of getting paid what I'm worth.
So as my dad told me a LONG time ago 'suck it up & do your job'...that's what will get you the higher pay you desire quit trying to social engineer the world to give you what you don't want to get by hard work.
Equal opportunity will always lead to unequal outcomes.
Achieving equal outcomes requires precisely crafted unequal opportunities. Aside from being unethical and contrary to the public good, that level of precision is beyond the reach of elected officials, and the attempt has always and will always lead to a cock-up.
On the plus side, men will give women all their money for a steady supply of sex and sandwiches. Women's lot in life is pretty damn good.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
At our company, we typically offer female programmers more - just because its so hard to get good ones. On fresh-out was asking/demanding $10K more than similar male counter parts. We would have paid it.
and they still can't figure out how to handle the situation, then they're a disorganized mess that most people would probably hate to work for anyway.
A good programmer can take years to replace. They're rare. When I applied for my job, I was chosen out of 3,000 candidates, and it took me about 6 months before my manager said my value broke even on my salary. Move forward a decade and our department's role has grown dramatically, increasing the amount of responsibilities each programmer has. We're at a point where it takes the average person about 5 years before they stop constantly interrupting the senior programmers.
Our department specializes in all specialties. We're a small group of programmers that get tasked with projects that other teams can't handle, and we typically solo the projects. We don't work on projects as a team, we only act as peers to bounce ideas off of or someone to ask for help when one of us gets stuck.
We fill that niche where a project needs to get done quickly, be pretty much bug free, nearly maintenance free, easily debugable in the rare occurrence something actually does go wrong, perform well, and has to handle feature creep.
My latest project has a $10,000/day fine for any downtime. It's been working nearly flawlessly for the past several years, and gets hammered by hundreds of thousands of users. My responsibility was to architect, spec the hardware, act as a central hub of communication for several departments because misunderstandings happen and we can't afford those, design, implement, and maintain. Pretty much a one man show for a multi-million dollar contract with an expensive SLA. I hate maintenance, so it's designed to be bullet proof. I obsess about corner cases. All failure cases have very specific reasons, and failures don't cause dirty data.
Tell me. If I said I was going to leave in 6 months, what would you do to replace me? The bus factor sucks for the business, but I'm healthy, relativity young, and they treat me well to keep me. I work 8-4:30, get to take about 3-4 hours of breaks, take vacation with virtually no notice, and work with other enjoyable people like myself with a great support team.
So for every dollar a man has to work for, they just give 72 cents to women? Why aren't they made to work for it?
Why do male employees exist? Anywhere?
If an employer could consistently hire females at roughly 75% the cost of males, why would there be any males on payroll? Who wouldn't simply terminate all the males, and replace them with females?
Thoughts?
"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus
You get what you settle for. Not what you're worth, not what someone else thinks you're worth. What you settle for. In my day - I'm retired - the women in IT made at least as much as the men, if not more. Why? They demanded it - and were worth it.
The reason for the disparity between men and women in STEM, and more precisely programming, is simple. Autism Spectrum Disorders, and more specifically Aspergers.http://blog.codinghorror.com/software-developers-and-aspergers-syndrome/
STEM: .. just like Asperger's.
skews heavily male
is fixated with order, syntax, and literal interpretation
allows you to deal with machines instead of people
requires a nearly obsessive focus
http://www.wired.com/2001/12/aspergers/
High functioning Autism affects men over women at a 10 to 1 ratio http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/08/how-autism-is-different-in-girls-vs-boys.html.
I wonder what that ratio would really be if everyone was diagnosed.
In short:
High Functioning Autistic people are better at STEM jobs.
High Functioning Autism affects men at a 10 to 1 ratio.
People who are better at their jobs get paid more.
Result:
More men in STEM
Men are higher paid
We got picked on all our lives because we were different, we joined an industry where we fit in, where our oddities were normal. Now the very same people that picked on us as children are trying to bully their way into our industry, and steal what we built. (Take our lunch money, again)
"... young adults. Women are far more likely during this period to be out for lower paid or completely unpaid maternity leave..."
Really? Have you looked at the statistics for age at first childbirth since birth control became widely available? You're applying 1950's mores and expectations to the modern world, with predictably ridiculous results.
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/01/14/462816458/average-age-of-first-time-moms-keeps-climbing-in-the-u-s
In 1970, average age (not average age among highly educated women) at the birth of the first child was 21. In 2014, it was 26.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/15/for-most-highly-educated-women-motherhood-doesnt-start-until-the-30s/
"Among mothers with a bachelor’s degree, fully 40% were past their 20s when they had their first child, and 14% were at least 35."
"The data show that more than half (54%) of mothers near the end of their childbearing years with at least a master’s degree had their first child after their 20s."
If a man makes a dollar he should be able to keep it all. Why should he give any of it to a woman, let alone nearly three-fourths of it?
3.9 to 6.3% is pretty damn small and may very well fall within the researcher's margin of error. And even if it doesn't, is that small of a different really because of discrimination? I highly doubt it. More than likely it traces right back to women's valuing different things from men, like benefits, time off, etc rather than raw pay.
"On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
That difference is after researchers adjust for factors such as age ....
No, the 94.6 is after, the 75.9 is before. Read the study.
Also, being a little pedantic, but in the study they say women in the US make 75.9 cents for every dollar a male makes which translates into a 24.1% "Male pay advantage". No it does not. Sure, 100 - 75.9 = 24.1, but the pay advantage is (or should have been defined as) "how much more does a male make as a percentage". That's the percentage you would have to add to a female wage to get to a male wage. Increasing the female wage by 24.1% does not get you to the male wage of $1.00 ($0.759 * 1.241 = $0.942 and not $1.00). It should have been 100/75.9=1.31752305665 or 31.8%.
...have you ever tried to re-purpose a sandwich maker and have it perform highly complex computational algorithms? It takes a lot of retooling.
There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
I would question whether these numbers are corrected properly for differences in actual programming experience. For example, if the female programmer claims she only started learning programming in college, that's already a red flag - most top notch male programmers have been programmer through their entire teens and have easily master 10,000 hours by the time a "started in college" programmer has graduated. Formal resume experience is NOT apples to apples here. Especially not with programming skills.
You should be able to have 28 % lower salary expenses. This is HUGE and you can easily out compete the other firms. ANY serious entrepeneur would immediately use such a tactic, anyone who cares about money and profits would. (Side bar, this is a glaring example of why free markets and profit-driven thinking is actually a good thing sometimes)
Seriously, if anybody believes this bollocks, put your money where your mouth is and go all-female software firm.
Oh wait, you won't actually do it? I guess you just want to harass people with fake statistics rather than actually act on it.
Liberty.