Slashdot Mirror
Apple, Facebook, IBM, and Microsoft Sign White House Pledge For Equal Pay (fortune.com)
In honor of Women's Equality Day, an anonymous reader shares with us a festive report from Fortune: More than two months after the White House first announced its Equal Pay Pledge for the private sector, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft and other major industry players have signed on. By taking the pledge, which was first introduced at the United State of Women Summit in June of this year, companies promise to help close the national gender pay gap, conduct annual, company-wide pay analyses, and review hiring and promotion practices. The new signees were announced in a White House statement on Friday -- which also happens to be Women's Equality Day, the anniversary of the ratification of the 19th amendment, which gave women the right to vote. Apple, which announced earlier this year that it has no pay gap, released a statement promising to dig even deeper into compensation. "We're now analyzing the salaries, bonuses, and annual stock grants of all our employees worldwide. If a gap exists, we'll address it," the company said in a statement. Twenty-nine companies signed the pledge on Friday, bringing the total number of signatories to 57. The pledge is part of a $50-million, White House-led initiative to expand opportunities for and improve the lives of women and girls. The consortium members issued a statement via Whitehouse.gov's press release: "The Employers for Pay Equity consortium is comprised of companies that understand the importance of diversity and inclusion, including ensuring that all individuals are compensated equitably for equal work and experience and have an equal opportunity to contribute and advance in the workplace. We are committed to collaborating to eliminate the national pay and leadership gaps for women and ethic minorities. Toward that end, we have come together to share best practices in compensation, hiring, promotion, and career development as well as develop strategies to support other companies' efforts in this regard. By doing so, we believe we can have a positive effect on our workforces that, in turn, makes our companies stronger and delivers positive economic impact." The consortium members include: Accenture, Airbnb, BCG, Care.com, CEB, Cisco, Deloitte, Dow, Expedia, EY, Glassdoor, GoDaddy, Jet.com, L'Oreal USA, Mercer, PepsiCo, Pinterest, Rebecca Minkoff, Salesforce, Spotify, Staples, Stella McCartney, and Visa.
Can they work equal time?
Cause in my experience there's a lot more "oh my children" time given and no "Hey I am a single white male" time compensated.
Fine, as long as it works both ways. There are two women on my team who earn more than me with less qualifications and are on my team solely because they are women. Diversity! I should expect a raise right?
So, did women pledge to work as hard as men do? Did they pledge to take as many overtime hours? Did they pledge to pursue the same risky and physically demanding careers, such as construction or mining?
Circumcision is child abuse.
Yeah, I didn't think so.
What stops you from giving up your job so that the oppressed can work? Why does the progressive left always require other people to suffer to make up for suffering their policies have caused? I'll bet if your livelihood was threatened to support the narrative you would change your tune real quick. Strange how that works Comrade.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Sounds like a good idea. What I'd like to know is when has there ever been equal pay or equality in anything ? Even when it was just the 'good ole boys' club there were always the ins and the outs. Those that were part of the skull and bones frat scene and those that were not. The nouveau riche https://www.google.com/#q=nouv... vs. the old money vs. the working class. No matter which side of the tracks you were born on equality has always been a struggle.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
"We're required to shove one SJW feminist STEM propaganda piece down our readers throats every week"?
Like the media outlets responsible for #GamerGate, it seems that more and more Slashdot's moderators actively loath their own readers...
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
I think if you read the actual agreement, I suspect it says "We promise to pay women just as much as we pay our male H1-Bs."
http://www.wsj.com/articles/th...
Yawn
So a word of advice to women in tech fields entering the workforce - stay away from companies that pander to you, you will be better off for it and have workers that treat you with real respect.
I'd rather work for a place that pays well, I'll work there for a few decades and retire. Besides, I'm pretty skeptical that anyone can earn respect from brogrammers, and I question why anyone would even bother trying.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
for introverts and extroverts.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
When will people wake up and stop eating up this stuff? The entire notion that there isn't equal pay for equal work is pure crap. If it wasn't crap, all these companies would have been hiring women all the time for every position because they could pay them less.
Lets do a little common sense here, I am a hiring manager and just interviewed two people with very similar qualifications, backgrounds, and work ethic, but one of them I can save ~20% on pay/benefits.... Wow, I wonder who I am hiring...
Wait, but you mean to say that the market doesn't work in this case, that all the financial market theory, best practices, etc., all cease to function once someone introduces the gender of an employee. Go back to college if you still think that (or more to the point go to college in the first place, just make sure you study a STEMS field, apparently we need more of them to drive costs down because we can't hire enough, and thus need more H1Bs, and yet wages are still mostly stagnant...).
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Sure... higher likelihood of death on the job, higher dropout rates, higher homelessness rates, higher legal obligation, higher deathtoll in wars, higher suicide rates, higher homicide rates, higher sentencing rates, less cancer research funding rates, smaller custody rates, higher victimization rates.
Enough ?
Equal pay for equal work is a nice phrase, but this is not the way the world works. Forget gender for a minute, and think about whether this approach has a chance to work in any situation where we're trying to equalize economic outcomes.
You don't get paid just based on the work you do. The risks you take, your ability to negotiate, and your ability to leverage your existing finances can play a much bigger role in how much money you make than your actual work. This is why investors make more money than management, who make more money than the people doing the work.
This policy of focusing on salary, standardized benefits, and career development worked in the economy a generation or two removed from today. Now, wealth and advancement are generated through job-hopping or maintaining ownership of your work, not annualized salary. I think telling women they'll do well by sticking with one company and fighting for raises and career development is a recipe to create a gender wage gap.
I'd rather work for a place that pays well, I'll work there for a few decades and retire.
Too bad that many employers these days don't keep employees that long. Heck at many companies you'd be lucky to make it to the point of qualifying for the health insurance/benefits package. Employee-churn helps to keep the costs of labor down when costs are driven up by government mandate.
The more that government causes labor costs to rise, the more ruthless employers will be forced to become towards the workforce in order to remain competitive, which will cause workers to grow ever-angrier & resentful towards employers. This is a good thing in the eyes of TPTB when TPTB are trying to incite class-warfare among the population as a reason to increase government power, scope, and control so as to maintain order.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Sorry, but you must be looking at different stats:
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17%
Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
The only articles I can find that say otherwise are ALL pointing to the same HuffPo article (not even a scholarly backed piece).
The "majority" of parents does indeed reach an agreement out of court, a little over 50% (Macooby & Mnookin) reaches a so-called uncontested agreement, that means at least 49% is contested. In SJW-world this would mean any contested cases should automatically go to the father right? Equality in numbers and all.
In a study of 705 cases, an uncontested request for maternal physical custody was made in 500 cases. The outcome matched the request for maternal custody in nearly 90% of such cases. In contrast, paternal physical custody was awarded in only 75% of the 47 cases in which there was an uncontested request for sole paternal physical custody. - So EVEN in uncontested cases (the mother agrees), the courts will 25% of the time override the parents' wishes and still grant the mother custody.
There are some 40,000 disputed custody cases every year which are decided by family court judges. These judges will listen to recommendations from court welfare officers who visit the family and write 35,000 reports every year. The welfare officers work in the probation service which deals with mostly male criminals, this makes it difficult to see fathers in a positive light. The result is that family courts award mothers sole custody in 71% of cases and fathers sole custody in 7% of all cases, joint custody is awarded in the remaining 21% of cases. Many fathers report giving up an expensive custody fight for their children after advice from lawyers who say they can't win. It is very common for mothers during custody battles to receive state funded legal aid. A custody battle is therefore a very unequal war of attrition. Many fathers report that efforts to have contact with their children are blocked by mothers, and the courts will not enforce the right of children to have contact with their fathers.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
"Which is not to say I'm unsympathetic, but the issue isn't the disparity, it's the things that drive people to suicide."
That's saying that women are incompetent at suicide. It's not like it's a big secret that pills and cutting aren't very likely to actually kill you and getting information of easily accessible methods that will actually get the job done isn't more than a search away (automotive assisted decapitation ftw!). Being capable of researching options isn't a gendered thing (or we should re-evaluate a lot of things).
I suspect the reality is that the disparity is largely based on the rational projections of future life chances. There's a large difference in the likely development of a life for those who aren't completely capable of dealing with it for men and women. Women make an ultimately rational choice to keep chances high to get help, because they have a significant chance of actually getting help, and even women who can never support themselves will often be able to life a somewhat decent life, get support from parents, attract a mate, etc. While men... well, a failed suicide attempt isn't exactly CV improving material.
So, whether a fully conscious choice or not, the disparity is sociologically and probably biologically rational. Men have better reasons to be serious about it if they decide to check out.
And I really don't see any tendencies that it will change. Rather, I think our care for women is biologically hardwired, and the way society is progressing for the moment, being unsympathetic to men is more popular than ever. I mean, fuck, look at something like BLM; even if, in reality, the black men are mainly getting shot due to being male rather than being black, would you try launching a 'mens lives matter' movement? I think not.
You sound tired. When you get some rest, have another look and see that the article you cited was an op-ed. Opinion. Commentary.
When they WSJ reports the news, there's a wage gap. When they give their feels, there isn't. Do you see a pattern here?
You are welcome on my lawn.
Higher suicide rate is actually more like a higher success at suicide rate.
Check your privilege, you tool of the patriachy! Your insinuation of the tired old accusation that men are more competent than women is offensive!. Just kidding, but if we are going to go there, I'm going to make fun of it.
When is this inequity iniquity going to end? We must tirelessly work until women are as successful as men in offing themselves. Close the suicide gap!
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
It definitively sucks to be judged by a collective based on your race and gender, rather than your individual merits and hardships.
Bigotry does not know limits based on gender. A female who decides all men are rapists is no different in principle that a Klan member who believes all blacks are inferior. All men have a rape switch http://jezebel.com/5279283/is-...
That's pretty offensive. But watch the feedback telling us that its somehow different.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The 'true' pay gap is 0.1-0.01% or something like that (a statistical error) in the western world and that may be due to (70-80% paid) maternity leave. The "problem" is the lifetime income gap, which has been closing but is somewhere on the order of -5 to 15% depending on the field. Educated women no longer stop work to take care of children and it's no longer odd that the father stops working these days as well.
Obviously employers would get an all-female workforce if it were legal for them to pay them even 1% less than equally qualified men.
This agreement is just White House endorsed commercial advertisement. It gets everybody in the news one last time.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Contested cases where the Custodial Father (meaning the child currently lives with the father) retains custody: 17%
Contested cases where the Custodial Mother retains custody: 83%
Could you maybe provide a citation when you quote numbers like this? Because your figures suspiciously add up to 100% here, even though you're claiming success rates for two different groups. Are you sure you don't just mean something like, "In contested custody cases, 17% go to the father and 83% go to the mother"? Because those numbers roughly mirror the the split between custodial parents overall (roughly 80-85% mothers, 15-20% fathers. which has been roughly the same over the past 25 years at least).
Anyhow, I agree that there are often still lingering inequalities and prejudice in the court system against fathers, despite the overturning of the "Tender Years" doctrine.
However, I'd also offer some important advice to fathers here: if you're actually concerned about this statistic (and not just trying to win some internet argument) -- spend time with your kids.
Seriously. While prejudice does still exist in the court system, you know another reason why mothers get custody a lot more? Because moms disproportionately spend more time with the kids and taking care of them, thus they can prove they are the "primary caregiver." Who ends up taking off work when the kid is sick, leaving early to attend a parent-teacher conference, maybe even rearranging the whole work schedule to be home in the afternoons with the kids? MANY more moms than dads do these sorts of things, and if you look at estimated time parents spend doing childcare-related activities each week, you'll see that moms disproportionately take a LOT more of the work in most families.
This is the flip side to those of you who are complaining about women who "want equal pay" but can't work as long hours "because of the kids." Well -- if you're the dad who is working long hours and never sees his kids, you're making a choice about your priorities in life. And if divorce happens -- and many people think it could never happen to them -- the court has a greater chance of siding with the parent who demonstrated greater interest and time commitment with the kids.
I've personally seen this sort of stuff happen with a couple friends -- they didn't realize how little time they were spending with kids until it was too late, and then they ended up with even less time in a custody agreement. In fact, lots of dads seem to prefer this stuff -- they are driven to work long hours, and many aren't particularly interested in spending a lot of time with kids (particularly small ones).
So, if we're TRULY going to have this argument, perhaps we need to have some real statistics that take such trends into account. You know -- like those who say, "But women just aren't as interested in engineering -- they put their time into other things and want to be nurses and such!" Well, most dads are less interested in child-rearing, and they demonstrate this on a regular basis by spending less time with the kids. Do you really need to wonder why mothers win more custody battles -- which are often decided on the basis of which parents the kids "have a closer bond" with and which parent "will be less disruptive to their routine already in place"? If the mom if already spending four times as much time doing childcare-related stuff each week as the dad (not at all uncommon), it's likely to be less disruptive for the kids to stay with mom. It's that simple.
You want to keep your kids? Maybe it's time to reconsider all those complaints about women who "have to leave work early because of kids" and maybe volunteer to do it yourself sometime.
And you know what? Your kids will actually love it, and they'll love you more for it. Unless of course you don't really want to spend that much time with your kids -- in which case, when you later fight a custody battle, is it really about spending time with the kids, or is just to "win" against the ex-wife you now hate?
I agree there is no difference morally, but there is a big difference societally. A female who decides all men are rapists gets rewarded with Title IX kangaroo courts in universities where the man's right to trial by jury is denied.
By the way, in the citadels of learning where much of the misandry is enabled, there are cracks in the foundations. The University of Chicago sent a letter to all incoming students that included in part:
"Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called 'trigger warnings,' we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual 'safe spaces' where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at adds with their own," the letter from Dean John Ellison said, sent Wednesday to the class of 2020.
"Members of our community are encouraged to speak, write, listen, challenge and learn, without fear of censorship," the letter also said. "You will find that we expect members of our community to be engaged in rigorous debate, discussion, and even disagreement. At times this may challenge you and even cause discomfort."
http://www.businessinsider.com... Full text https://twitter.com/ChicagoMar...
The problem of course is that in earlier attempts to be inclusive of other viewpoints, Universities have found that many of those who desired inclusiveness had no intention of granting it to others. Not only that, but the denials of expression that the snowflake crowd demanded started to extend into ridiculous areas, such as chasing comedians off campus, and while one could find Bill Maher offensive - of course, that's what he's trying to do, be offensive , funny and make you think, but their outrage extended to Jerry Seinfeld. Seinfeld and others don't even play college campuses any more.
The snowflakes even extended their umbrage unbrella toward Halloween costumes. They would deny others what they demand for themselves.
This might be coming to an end, as Universities are figuring out that the model is a tyranny of the presumably oppressed. Expect to see the whackadoodle element scramble to find other places where they can act all outraged.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.