Wisconsin Governor veto's Fair Pay Bill for Women

Discussion in 'Labor & Employment' started by Forum4PoliticsBot, Apr 10, 2012.

  1. Forum4PoliticsBot

    Forum4PoliticsBot New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    Messages:
    657
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
  2. PatrickT

    PatrickT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    16,501
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    With a citation to Laborradio.org given I assume you would want Governor Walker recalled. And, the blurb you cited is hilarious but it's upsetting to think union thugs actually believe that nonsense. The "women earn $.78 cents for every $1" has been debunked so often it's embarrassing but for nitwits it still works.

    Now, something to really frighten you. Women live much longer than men. It's a conspiracy. We must act on this now.

    So, best of luck to Gov. Walker and I hope the thugs and crooks lose. Not that I don't feel sorry for teachers who had to start paying a little bit for health care. At least they don't have to pay what the private sector pays.
     
  3. Reiver

    Reiver New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You'd have to control for human capital and also bias created by differentials in promotion chances. Has your debunking at least achieved that?
     
  4. MisLed

    MisLed New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    7,299
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The obama administration pays its women employees on average 11,000 less than it does the men.
     
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    62,205
    Likes Received:
    5,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have to take into account that many women exit and re-enter the workplace due to taking time out for children, which decreases their chances of continued promotion.

    The women that forego having children do much better in the workplace in the long run.

    Another bill trying to tell business how to run is just another move toward totalitarian democracy.
     
  6. Reiver

    Reiver New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Already mentioned that via the reference to human capital. Note, however, that the standard reference to 'statistical discrimination' (where, for example, we refer to female sprog raising) has been found to be incapable of explaining differentials in compensation performance. For example, the probability of job turnover is often found to be higher for males.
     
  7. Random_Variable

    Random_Variable New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm outraged everytime I hear this, especially if it's true. If it is true, I think that women are way overpaid. Given their inferiority in every aspect of life, as a male I am insulted that women earn more than 50 cents for every $1 I make.
     
  8. toddwv

    toddwv Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    28,132
    Likes Received:
    3,809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No. It pays women the same wages for the same jobs.
     
  9. septimine

    septimine New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Most of the differences in pay and promotion come from the very simple fact that most women take a few years off when they have kids. Gaps in employment lower your pay, and diminish your chances of getting promoted. I don't see discrimination except in the fat that Woman want more pay for doing less actual work.

    One of the big things that actually holds women back is the FMLA act -- it says that an employee can suddenly take a year off to care for a sick relative. Problem is that most of the people who use FMLA are women, and it gives employers a bit of pause when choosing a woman to run a business critical office. You simply cannot promote a woman because if she goes out on FMLA, you lose the leader of that department, the money you spent training the woman, and the money that you now must spend to train someone else. Of course once you do that, you must replace the new manager with the manager who hasn't set foot in the office for 12 months and waste yet more time and money getting her up to speed. Or you can hire a man whose wife will do all the FMLA stuff and not have to worry that he'll take 12 months off suddenly.

    Women have it all handed to them on a golden platter, and then they want to sue because a man working full time makes more money than she makes working part time.
     
  10. Reiver

    Reiver New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You'd have to show that all wage (and promotion) differentials are the result of efficiency (i.e.reflecting human capital differences). Can you do that?
     
  11. BleedingHeadKen

    BleedingHeadKen Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Messages:
    14,824
    Likes Received:
    308
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It seems to me that if one wants to undercut one's competitors, one can gain a *huge* advantage on labor costs by hiring only women. Right?
     
  12. Reiver

    Reiver New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Only if you assume that discrimination can be understood via Becker's "taste for discrimination" approach. For example, if we take the Marxist approach then both males and females can be weakened by discriminatory practices (i.e. divide & conquer)
     
  13. PatrickT

    PatrickT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    16,501
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I know this is a blow to the trial lawyers but they'll recover. I'm sure the Democrats will pass some other laws they can use to sue.

    Isn't paying women less than men in the same job already illegal by federal law, if you're not the President of the U.S.?
     
  14. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    62,205
    Likes Received:
    5,475
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Like most Marxist propaganda, the title of the bill usually has nothing to do with the goal

    Take this one for example where auto manufacturers will be mandated to put a black box in every vehicle only to be used by the federal government pushed by Reid and Pelosi and will also revoke passports if you own taxes, something that will be challenged in court since it is unconstitutional.

     
  15. PatrickT

    PatrickT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    16,501
    Likes Received:
    357
    Trophy Points:
    83
    No kidding. The Employee Free Choice Act was really the Card Check Act. It's actually insulting to have an act designed to promote union thuggery called "Employee Free Choice Act".
     
  16. septimine

    septimine New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Are you really that stupid?

    First, when the baby is born, who takes that maternity leave (hint: it ain't the man)
    When the kid gets sick and needs to be picked up early from school, who does it?
    When the kid is too sick to go to school or daycare, but too young to stay home alone, who else stays home?
    Which children are more likely to take in their parents?

    So at every turn, the WOMAN is the one taking time off of work to care for the family. Which means time not working, or part time hours to take care of family issues, things men never do -- at least not very often. So when wages are given out, women are taking home about the same as a man would if he was constantly calling in sick and leaving early and demanding special hours -- which is to say 25% less. When you don't make work a priority, the boss doesn't make you a priority. If you call in sick a lot, you don't get promoted. DEAL WITH IT. Either put in the same hours as a man does, without taking time off when the kids get sick, or put up with the lesser pay you've earned. Just don't work less than a man does and then cry discrimination when your part time labor doesn't make as much money as a man's full time employment. you want rewards? EARN THEM.
     
  17. Reiver

    Reiver New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    25,824
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not interested in the foot stamping. I said:

    You'd have to show that all wage (and promotion) differentials are the result of efficiency (i.e.reflecting human capital differences). Can you do that?

    That requires reference to empirical evidence (particularly as the standard statistical discrimination story, based on perceived average differences across gender, is often rejected). Achieve that and we can avoid the tantrum stuff!
     

Share This Page