Showing posts with label Fair Pay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fair Pay. Show all posts

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Setback for Paycheck Fairness

Apparently our senate is not making wage discrimination a priority:

A bill aimed at stamping out wage discrimination was blocked Wednesday as too few senators voted to move forward with the legislation, the Wall Street Journal reported Nov. 17. The Paycheck Fairness Act was short by two votes.

The bill passed in the U.S. House of Representatives last year and would have amended the Equal Pay Act to limit the defense that employers can use to respond to charges of wage discrimination based on sex, among other actions. In a press statement, Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis said she would continue fighting for the legislation so "women are not treated as second class citizens by employers who refuse to compensate them in a fair and equitable manner."

You know what to do, contact your senator and tell them that you want them to stand up for equal pay.

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Women Underrepresented in Management

According to a government report, the number of women in managing positions only increased a lousy one percent (from 39 to 40 percent) between 2000 and 2007. This is especially ridiculous considering that women are now the majority in colleges and universities and comprise 46.8% of the labor force.

Nanette Fondas at the Ms. Magazine blog has a fitting acronym to explain why: W.O.M.E.N.

W- "Work-family spillover"

O-"lack of Open, flexible work options"

M-"Masculine model of the 'ideal' worker"

E-"Evaluations of performance punish use of flexible work policies"

N-"No time for activism"

To learn more about the meaning behind the acronym, read Nanette's full post
here.

Friday, July 3, 2009

Hollywood and Pay Discrimination

Check out this brilliant breakdown of pay discrimination for Hollywood actresses by Stephanie at Bitch Flicks.

She looks at the top 15 actors and actresses, Oscar nominations and wins, box office grosses and Rotten Tomato rankings and finds that across the board, films with the top 15 actresses have higher critic ratings while grossing $735 million to the men's $746 million. Additionally, the actresses garnered more Oscar nominations and wins than the men, yet were paid collectively less than half of what the men made.

The top earning woman was Angelina Jolie (27 million) and the bottom earning woman was Kate Winslet (2 million). In comparison, the top earning man was Harrison Ford (65 million) and the bottom earning man was Vince Vaughan (14 million).

Stephanie writes, "Will someone please explain to me how this isn't blatant gender-based discrimination?"

While these are some of the highest paid women in the world, they are still victims of the pay discrimination that influences women everywhere. From the waitress working the third shift to Kate Winslet to Lilly Ledbetter, women experience pay discrimination, even the women American media idolizes. Every woman is at risk.

Let this list remind us of how sexism and the notion that women are somehow less than pervades our culture, seeps through its pores and infects everything we touch, even - especially - our paychecks.

Saturday, May 16, 2009

Women, just act more like men and your problems will disappear

I found this piece in the BBC Magazine about how there are significant pay gaps in Britain, and how they can be attributed to differences in how women and men approach asking for raises, and even differences in pay expectations.

The author discussed the huge differences in the amount of money men and women expect and think they deserve to earn five years into their careers. Men believe that they deserve 25% more than women feel they deserve.

Emphasis mine:

I think this illustrates not only the fact that there is a disparity in what we pay men and women, but also that your expectations affect your behaviour and help sustain the status quo.

Actually, I think that expecting women to change their behavior/expectations without looking for ways to change the system is what helps sustain the status quo. "The system" - the way women are not only taught to be quiet and pleasant, but the way that when they do speak up for themselves (like men), they are portrayed as bitches - this is what keeps the status quo intact. Women are taught from a young age that standing up for themselves can have negative consequences, yet that is exactly what this piece seems to think will solve the problem of unequal wages in Britain.

I disagree. This is not a problem of individual women as much as it is a problem about societies that still do not see women as being equal to men.

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Blog for Fair Pay Day - Fact #3

FACT: You can do something about the wage gap! Write to your Senators about passing the Paycheck Fairness Act. This act will help strengthen the existing laws against wage discrimination and will give the federal government the resources needed so it can be more proactive about correcting this problem. The bill already passed the House of Representatives. Now it's time to urge the Senate to act.

Want to learn more before you take action? More information here and here.

Blog for Fair Pay Day - Fact #2

FACT: In my home state of Illinois, women only earn an average of 73% of what the average man makes. This state ranks 40 out of 50 states (plus Washington D.C.). Want to see where your state falls when it comes to the wage gap? Check this out.

Blog for Fair Pay Day - Fact #1

FACT: Tuesday, April 28 (today) symbolizes the day in 2009 when the average woman's wages will finally catch up with those paid to the average man in 2008. via.

Monday, August 11, 2008

NWLC: Women worried about the future... well, yeah, everyone should be

From the National Women's Law Center:

According to a newly released poll conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates for the National Women’s Law Center, women are significantly more pessimistic than men in their attitudes about the status quo in America, both on a societal level and in terms of their own lives. Women are more likely than men to feel that they are falling behind economically, and are more likely than men to be worried and concerned about their economic prospects.


“Women today face enormous challenges,” states Marcia D. Greenberger, Co-President of the National Women’s Law Center. “They often struggle to achieve economic security and health care that meets their needs, and face difficulties securing access to equal education and employment opportunities.”


The statistics are alarming: One in four girls drops out of high school. More than 14 million women live in poverty, and more than 17 million women have no health insurance. Women still earn only 77 cents for every dollar paid to men. When women volunteer the most important issues facing American women today, they are most likely to cite: health care issues (including women’s health issues); pay for women and the issue of equal pay; opportunities for women in the work place; education; child care issues; and women’s rights in general.


This is no surprise - other data shows that women are disproportionately affected by the economic depression, slowndown, mush, or whatever you'd like to call it. I'd like to note that the linked article states women earn 80 cents to every white man's dollar - wrong (white women - 77 cents, black women - 63 cents, Latinas - 52 cents to every white man's $1.o0).


If 59% of women are worried about the future compared to 46% of men, I've got the feeling some men (and women) aren't pay enough attention. If women are disproportionately affected by the economy, well then damn right they're going to be more worried about the future.


I find this one pretty interesting: 77% of women said it was very or extremely important that the new president and Congress take on the issue of pay equity after they are sworn into office in January.


What's that? Women support the (idea of) the Paycheck Fairness Act? Who knew?! Certainly not Bush, who has threatened to veto the bill, saying it will cause a surge in litigation.


When President "W stands for Women" Bush threatens vetoing a bill that will work towards paying women equally, of course women are going to be worried about the future. It's just one of the signs indicating that this administration doesn't give a damn about the systematic oppression of women and, in fact, works to aid that oppression.


So yeah, I'd say there's a lot to be worried about.


Thanks to the heads-up from our friends at the National Women's Law Center, their Womenstake blog about their survey, their Platform for Progress, and a piece from Politico.


Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Action Alert on the Paycheck Fairness Act

My good friend Becca, who is currently working at Wider Opportunities for Women as a local intern in DC, reminded me that the Paycheck Fairness Act is at a critical point in the bill process:
The Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338), is scheduled for a markup in the House Education and Labor Committee THIS THURSDAY, July 24, and will face a floor vote soon thereafter. Call your representative as soon as you can to voice your support for this critical piece of legislation. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and below you can find a good synopsis of the legislation.

The House is expected to vote in the next two weeks on the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338). We have a critical opportunity to urge Congress to make real progress on pay equity. Even if you have contacted your representative about this legislation in the past, we ask you to again urge your representative to support this legislation and oppose any attempts to weaken it.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would update and strengthen the Equal Pay Act of 1963, closing loop holes and improving the law’s effectiveness. The Paycheck Fairness Act would, among other things, deter wage discrimination by strengthening penalties for equal pay violations, and by prohibiting retaliation against workers who inquire about employers' wage practices or disclose their own wages. The bill also requires employers to show that wage gaps are truly a result of factors other than sex, collect better data on wages, reinstate activities that promote equal pay at the Department of Labor, and develop training for women and girls on salary negotiations. The bill’s measured approach does not impose arbitrary caps on damages, which would only further penalize women who are victims of pay discrimination.

Women on average continue to earn only 77 cents on the dollar to their male counterparts. With a record 69 million women in the workforce, wage discrimination hurts the majority of American families. In addition, wage discrimination lowers total lifetime earnings, reducing women’s benefits from Social Security and pension plans and inhibiting their ability to save not only for retirement but for other lifetime goals such as buying a home and paying for a college education.

A vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act is a critical step forward in our goal to close the persistent and sizable wage gaps between men and women. Urge your representative to support the Paycheck Fairness Act.

For the full text of the bill, visit http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1338

Possible Message to Representatives:

Opening:
As your constituent, I urge you to support the Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R. 1338) when this critical legislation comes to the floor for a vote. I also urge you to vote against a motion to recommit and any other attempts to weaken this bill.

Optional Message Points (advocates can choose several, in whatever order they’d like):

• Women on average continue to earn only 77 cents on the dollar to their male counterparts. Now is the time to address wage discrimination by updating and strengthening the Equal Pay Act, closing loop holes and improving the law’s effectiveness.

• The Paycheck Fairness Act would deter wage discrimination by strengthening penalties for pay inequities, and barring retaliation against workers who disclose their own wages. I agree with the bill’s measured approach, and am glad it doesn’t impose random caps on damages that only serve to further penalize women who are victims of pay discrimination.

• Paying women equal pay for equal work can create a positive work environment, which can help increase productivity and reduce absenteeism. One survey found that business leaders consider the elimination of wage discrimination between different jobs to be “good business,” and say that equal pay is necessary to remain competitive.

• The wage gap has real consequences. With a record 69 million women in the workforce, wage discrimination hurts the majority of American families, both in terms of their economic security today and their retirement security tomorrow.

• Equal pay for equal work is a simple matter of justice for women. I strongly support the Paycheck Fairness Act as it seeks to close the persistent and sizable wage gap that remains between men and women.

Conclusion:
Again, I urge you to vote for the Paycheck Fairness Act when it comes to the floor later this month, and I also urge you to vote against a motion to recommit and any other attempts to weaken this bill. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response.

I'm not sure where this text is from - if anyone knows, could they let me know so I can update and link?

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

180 Days

That's how long you have to report pay discrimination. In six short months after a pay discrimination decision was made, you must report that discrimination. Any reports about past pay discrimination or long term discrepancies will be legally ignored.

Oh, you don't feel comfortable asking your co-workers what they make in comparision to you the day you begin your job? Or, wait, you're not even supposed to talk about pay? Too bad...for you.

Thanks to Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Compay, companies can continue paying women less than their co-workers. As long as the women don't find out about it.

The Misogyny of Wage Gaps

Today is the 45th anniversary of the Equal Pay Act, which was passed by the late President Kennedy on June 10, 1963. Since then, we've come a long way, but persistent and blatant wage gaps continue to be an issue. I think that my fellow Impersonators, Lindsay and Amelia, have covered the basics far more eloquently than I am capable of without sounding repetitive.

Regardless, wage gaps are a part of a much larger phenomenon than simple misogyny in the workplace. Female work, even if it is the same work that a male can and does do, is consistently undervalued. If a woman does a man's work, she more likely to be underpaid and less likely to be promoted. If a woman does a woman's job—housekeeping, mothering, teaching—she is more likely to see exponential wage gaps, or no monetary compensation at all.

Take any traditionally female-dominated field and it is easy to see how much more undervalued and underpaid the work is compared to traditionally masculine fields. Even underpaid and overworked masculine careers like police officers and firefighters garner more respect than a maid, a nanny, or an elementary school teacher.

Nowhere is this more apparent than the case of the stay-at-home mother. I have nothing for respect for women, such as my mother, who choose to devote all of their waking hours to their children. Regardless, women in America often have to choose between a career and a family. Women that choose to stay home and raise children, arguably the most important job a person can do, labor unpaid to the tune of $117,000 per year. My parents had an ugly divorce when I was fairly young, and one of my father's complaints was that my mother used him as a "free meal ticket". My mother, under appreciated and overworked, labored day and night to raise me and my brother in the manner in which she felt was appropriate. How many other mothers are demeaned for their work? How many others are under-appreciated? Mothers are the backbone of our society, and yet, much scorn is heaped upon the woman who dares to stay home, raise the children and maintain the household, and occasionally shop or do things for herself.

For those that choose to work and have children, or are forced to as single parents or because of financial difficulties, the stereotypical "women's work", such as housekeeping and childcare, still falls disproportionately on our shoulders. This phenomenon was dubbed the "second shift" by Arlie Russell Hochschild in The Second Shift and The Time Bind, where she used peer-reviewed research to show that in two-career couples, men and women usually work equal hours but women still do a disproportional amount of housework.

Imagine the amount of work woman do to uphold this society that goes unappreciated, unpaid, or underpaid. A single mother chasing after her ex-husband for child support is regarded as greedy and should stay out of his wallet (another gem parroted by my father, even today). A single father that works and raises his children by himself is a saint, a real trooper. The double-standard is pervasive, especially when it couples with racism to form the myth of the welfare-queen: poor southern black women who have children for their own selfish gain.

I know that no amount of legislation such as the Fair Pay Act will ever amount to true fair pay unless the persistent devaluing of "women's work" utterly ceases. Our struggle to get paid the same amount for the same work is part of a larger struggle for women everywhere to do what needs doing—whether that is behind a desk, at the stove or both—and be able to support ourselves and our families.

Remember that when we discuss Fair Pay, we are really addressing the systematic and pervasive devaluation of anything a woman chooses to do for the simple fact that she is not a man.

(Cross-posted)

Monday, June 9, 2008

Happy 45th Anniversary of the Equal Pay Act!

Forty-five years ago, on June 10 1963, President Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act, making it illegal to pay different people different amounts for the same work. Huzzah!

Fat lot of good it did, though, as white women are still payed 77 cents to every white man's dollar, African-American women are payed 66 cents to a white man's dollar and Latina women earn 53 cents to a white man's dollar. Across the board through all different kinds of fields and education levels, unequal pay according to gender persists in the American economy and workforce as institutionalized sexism.

Well, what about "women's choices"? You know, the stuff like makin' babies and dinner - those "women's choices" to put family first, because you know women with careers don't think about their families at all. The National Women's Law Center says, "Recent authoritative studies show that even when all relevant career and family attributes are taken into account, there is still a significant, unexplained gap in men's and women's earnings. Thus, even when women make the same career choices as men and work the same hours, they earn less."

Ok, so unequal pay isn't a result of career choices and persists regardless of socio-economic or racial categories, which means that it hurts everyone - men, women, children, families, single people, divorced, disabled, widowed, people with brown hair, people with black hair, people with five fingers, people who shave their legs and even those hippies and feminist-crazies who don't.

Here's what you can do:

Support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which says that people can sue for pay discrimination within 180 days of their last paycheck, not 180 since their first paycheck. That means that if you've been working at the same company for five years and you've recently discovered that you're the victim of pay discrimination since hiring, you can sue your company for the past five years of pay discrimination. This new law would replace the recent Supreme Court ruling stating that people can only sue for pay discrimination within 180 days of the first incident. So if you've been paid unfairly for the past five years, you would have needed to discover the discrimination and sue within the first three months. In a society that's cultured not to discuss wages, especially among women, it's pretty damn hard to discover pay discrimination within three months of starting a new job/new salary. Not to mention this means that any women currently experiencing pay discrimination in their jobs (perhaps of many years or decades) would be screwed.

Here's info on the Fair Pay campaign, a fact sheet produced by the National Women's Law Center, and most important, a letter to your senator supporting the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. If you live in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Florida, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, or Virginia, one or both of your senators voted against the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act the first time around. You need to write them and tell him/her to get their ass in gear and support the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. I'm looking at you, Alabamians, Alaskans, Indianians, Iowans, Floridians, Nebraskans, New Mexicans, North Carolinians, Ohioans, Texans, and Virginians (who we all know are for lovers). Get on the ball and make sure your senator(s) know you're not happy with the way they're representing you.

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Republicans make trouble for unequal pay act

Today Senate Republicans successfully blocked a bill which had the potential to make it easier for people to sue when faced with discriminatory pay. This bill, called the Fair Pay Restoration Act (but also known as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act), came as a response to a decision that the Supreme Court made in 2007 which stated that any person who claims pay discrimination must have their complaint filed within 180 days of that discrimination beginning. This six-month limit is troublesome due to the many difficulties that can arise when trying to prove pay discrimination.

Republicans complained that the bill would produce a flood of lawsuits and criticized the chamber's Democratic leaders for putting off the vote until the party's two presidential candidates, Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, returned from the campaign trail.

Reading that made me wonder, why do the Republicans believe there will be a "flood of lawsuits?" Seems to me that they are acknowledging the fact that pay discrimination exists (why else would there be lawsuits?) but they would rather just sweep it under the rug.

That deadline is specified in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines, and it "protects employers from the burden of defending claims arising from employment decisions long past," Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the majority in the 5-4 decision.

The bill that stalled Wednesday would have reset the clock with every paycheck, with supporters arguing that each paycheck was a discriminatory act. But Sen. Johnny Isakson, a Georgia Republican, said the bill would allow retirees drawing pensions to sue their old companies over allegations of discrimination that happened decades ago...

...The case was brought by an Alabama woman, Lilly Ledbetter, who claimed that her employer, Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., paid men doing similar work 15 to 40 percent more. Ledbetter said she discovered the discrepancy late in her career -- too late, the court ruled, to go to court.

Sigh.

Friday, April 18, 2008

Another Post for Fair Pay!

So, on our radio show yesterday, Amelia and I talked a little bit about fair pay, and we started getting into the repercussions for women when they make so much less than men. These repercussions are as varied having to support oneself through prostitution to begin forced to give up a career to raise children at the home.

However these have been discussed in previous posts on this blog. Lindsay mentioned earlier that for every dollar a white man earns, I will earn 77 cents. My Mexican roommate will earn 52 cents and my black friends will earn 62 cents. The Fair Pay Movement really isn't all about the "white man dollar," but about the monetary inequities between white women and women of color. It really speaks to a larger problem within the feminist movement.

As a white feminist and new feminist, I don't feel "qualified" to write about the racial factions of the feminist movement, but I want to dedicate my post, this post for fair pay not only for my missing 23 cents, but for the missing 48 cents of one of my best friends and for the 25 cents that separates us.

We demand fair pay now!

Fair Pay and the Equal Rights Amendment

On behalf of Blog for Fair Pay Day, I reflected on the considerable resistance to legally prohibiting sexism in the work place. There are several acts and amendments being considered by our legislators, one of which is the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act briefly covered in Lindsay's post.

However, when I was first informed of this "Blog for Fair Pay" event, I did not think of the Fair Pay Act; I did not even know it existed. What immediately came to mind is the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which has been introduced in every session of Congress since 1923. If passed, our 28th Amendment would read:

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification

Our 110th Congress (2007-2008) has introduced the amendment as S.J. Res. 10 and H.J. Res. 40. Both bills do not include the historical third section.

This amendment, over eighty years in the making, would finally grant women equal rights in all legal matters as guaranteed by the federal government. Currently, various states do grant various legal protections by law, but the fact remains that not only is there no federal amendment barring discrimination by sex and not since 1972 has the amendment passed both houses of Congress.

The federal ERA would prohibit states from restricting state-funded abortions differently from other "medically necessary" procedures sought by men. This interpretation of the ERA was upheld in 1998 when the New Mexico Supreme Court found that the state's ERA required that Medicaid pay for abortions. Justice Minzer ruled:

New Mexico's Equal Rights Amendment requires a searching judicial inquiry to determine whether the Department's rule prohibiting state funding for certain medically necessary abortions denies Medicaid-eligible women equality of rights under law. We conclude from this inquiry that the Department's rule violates New Mexico's Equal Rights Amendment because it results in a program that does not apply the same standard of medical necessity to both men and women, and there is no compelling justification for treating men and women differently with respect to their medical needs in this instance.

Furthermore, opponents have argued that an ERA would require the legal recognition of same-sex marriages because the amendment would prohibit any legislation that bars participation from a legal contract on the basis of gender. Other considerations that have defeated the bill are claims that an ERA would draft women, prohibit same-sex schools, and require that women serve on the front lines of the armed forces.

It is instrumentally important that we urge our legislators to pass the federal ERA, especially if the amendment could finally guarentee women's right to contraceptives and abortion once and for all. Luckily, twenty-one states already have an ERA on the books: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virgina, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Unfortunately, twenty-nine states, despite attempts, do not have an ERA, including my home-state of lovely Arizona (one of the few states that did not ratify the federal ERA when it passed both houses in 1972).

Today, as we reflect on the necessity of Fair Pay, and our outrage that income is still so variable upon gender and race, we should remember that not only have some legislators curtailed our right to object to unequal pay, they have defeated the ratification of an amendment that would grant us equality under law repeatedly for over six centuries.

Cross-posted at XXBlaze

Blog for Fair Pay Day!

White Men - $1.00/1.00

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$



White Women - $.77/1.00

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$



African-American Women - $.63/.100

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$



Latinas - $.52/1.00

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$


Still think we live in an equal society, one governed entirely by our own actions?

Our society dictates that it's impolite to talk about each other's salaries, so often this gap goes by unnoticed. The Supreme Court limited the amount of passed time one was able to sue about their salary to the first experience of discrimination. So if you're being payed unfairly and you don't realize it within 180 days, you're screwed. (And as is becoming increasingly familiar - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg writes a dissent saying "WTF.") Write to your senator here to support the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that reverses the previous decision.


And just a reminder - The Equal Pay Act says this:


(d) (1) No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this
section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are
employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in
such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to
employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the
performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which
are performed under similar working conditions.

**I don't have the statistics in front of me, but if I remember correctly, Asian women are either slightly higher than white women or slightly lower. If anyone has solid data, post it in the comments.