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...
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.
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
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.
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.
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?
"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.
The survey accounts for exactly that.
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.
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.
In the field of computer programming, there is a massive shortage of female labor (anecdotally, the only women in my 5 years of college CS classes were foreign exchange students or women doing continuing education, and past their mid-30s, this was awhile ago, but I don't believe it has changed much at all). So it is impossible to hire enough women to drive men out of the industry.
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."
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.
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.
How many women programmers do you know? In my school, the only women in CS classes were foreign exchange students or continuing education women older than 35. My intro classes had student sizes well over 100 and that was still true. Companies very possibly would hire many more female programmers, but there is a labor shortage of them.
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.
Sysadmin is the most thankless job in the world; you only get attention when things don't work. Keep everything working perfectly, and you're invisible It's not a position I would wish on anyone.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
You haven't met any actual female computer programmers, have you?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
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.
There is a simpler explanation: most companies are completely incapable of measuring the actual productivity of programmers, so compensation is based on other factors... like who is better at kissing up to the boss. (I would think women would be better than men at that... why aren't they paid more?)
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
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.
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.
Sure. 2 years in IT + 2 years in construction = 4 years in IT. Makes sense.
Learn to negotiate.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Only a moron works 100 hours a week.
Even 55 of _actual work_ is too much. Don't count hours zoning out in meetings, just get sunglasses and learn to sleep sitting up.
You will end up crispy at 55. At 100 they are certainly net negative workers on week 2.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
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.
How hard is it to have one 'problem' per year that makes you an IT hero?
The trick is to plan the problem. Close enough to a deadline that everyone knows about it, far enough that you fix it with plenty of time.
BOFH IS an instruction manual for new sysadmins. Read if from the start.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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 wonder how many times the women had to leave their desk to be sick due to the smell.
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'
Punchline:
Husband: I learned to live with it, the pig will too.
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.
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 !
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.
I wonder if they adjusted for how many times the men have to come over and write code for them
Can confirm that in over 21 years in the industry I've never seen that.
I have however seen a man do his work during the day then go home and do half his wife's work in the evenings. Both computer programmers, at the same company.
like who is better at kissing up to the boss. (I would think women would be better than men at that... why aren't they paid more?)
Because women, on the whole, don't go out drinking and golfing with their bosses, or play pick-up hoops, or root for the same football/baseball/hockey/basketball team (or any team for that matter), or any number of other manly things which put you on a personal basis with the boss. The best programmer in the world will make their own career, but for everyone in the middle 90% it's about who you and how you connect inter-personally than what your output is.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
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....
0.72 out of every dollar a male makes goes to a female.
That's a huge improvement! My father gave 100% of his paycheck to my mother each week. If he didn't, all hell would break loose and he would have to sleep in the truck.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
He'll be sucking halon soon enough.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
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.