sshhhh, conservatives don't like the word equality...
Equality equals taking from them
Every Republican Senator Said NO To Equal Pay For Women. Do YOU Support Equal Pay For Equal Work ?
Che Guevara - Hero
2012/06/12 13:39:50
|
|
|||||
|
157 votes
|
|
87% | ||
|
23 votes
|
|
13% | ||
Every Republican Senator Said NO To Equal Pay For Women. Do YOU Support Equal Pay For Equal Work ?
An election-year Democratic measure designed to ensure that women don't face pay discrimination was blocked Tuesday by Republicans who complained that the bill was politically inspired and would reward trial lawyers at the expense of employers.
The motion, which needed 60 votes to succeed, got only 52, not one from a Republican.
President Obama issued a statement criticizing Republicans for putting "partisan politics ahead of American women and families."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, standing at a news conference with pay equity advocate Lilly Ledbetter, accused Republicans of "wanting to stick their heads in the sand" about the longstanding issue of women being paid less than men. "But it's clear where Democrats stand," Reid said.
The bill, which Democrats said would close loopholes in the 1963 Equal Pay Act, would require employers to prove that differences in pay were related to job performance, not gender; would prevent employers from forbidding employees from sharing salary information with each other; and would allow women who believe they were discriminated against to sue for damages.
Democrats acknowledged privately that they expected to make political gains with women by pressing to close the pay gap, which they said has women earning just 77 cents on the dollar compared with men.
Republicans, fearful that Democrats were trying to portray them as insensitive to women, argued that they oppose pay discrimination but disagree with the Democrats' bill, which was written without their input. Republicans remained largely silent about the issue in the days leading up to the vote, even as Democrats, led by the president, made an all-out push for the legislation.
Read More: http://articles.cnn.com/2012-06-05/politics/politi...
Top Opinion
-
Wilde~MoonChild ™ 2012/06/12 14:18:38
He started out $1.50 more per hour than me. We didn't have different skill levels (if anything I was better than him), we worked the same shifts (and, after about 6 months, I shifted to nights, which should have bumped me to $10, but didn't). It was plain sexism, and a classic example of why they forbade people discussing pay rates.
Republicans don't like women , nor minorities ,... just place a few in places of goverment to look un-biased ,... which means those selected are false con$ervatives .
Why would we want corporations to feel bound by law? The whole thing is outrageous.
They want a government just big enough to monitor all of the nation's vaginas, but not so big as to regulate commerce and fairness as the Constitution requires of them.
if public sector yes but private sector up to employers
as long as you factor in all benefits into it like maternity and such things
On the surface of it, "equal pay for equal work" is a no-brainer concept.
When the work is truly equal (identical job description), performed by men and women of equal qualifications (including experience, seniority, etc.) then of course the pay should be equal -- except for performance pay, such as commission, bonuses tied to performance, etc. If a man and a woman are both new college graduates and they are both teaching high school English at the same school, of course they should make the same money.
Here is where it falls apart: Sooner or later, government will decide that unequal jobs are "effectively" equal. For example: Teaching requires a 4-year degree. For a variety of reasons, a disproportionate number of teachers are women. Trash collector is a job that requires nothing but the willingness to empty trash cans into a truck. For a variety of reasons, most trash collectors are men. If a first-year trash collector earns more than a first year teacher, that's not a "problem", it's the free market. Teachers get the summer off, they get nifty benefits, and rock-solid job security, while they work in air-conditioned comfort. Trash collectors have dreadful working conditions. B...
On the surface of it, "equal pay for equal work" is a no-brainer concept.
When the work is truly equal (identical job description), performed by men and women of equal qualifications (including experience, seniority, etc.) then of course the pay should be equal -- except for performance pay, such as commission, bonuses tied to performance, etc. If a man and a woman are both new college graduates and they are both teaching high school English at the same school, of course they should make the same money.
Here is where it falls apart: Sooner or later, government will decide that unequal jobs are "effectively" equal. For example: Teaching requires a 4-year degree. For a variety of reasons, a disproportionate number of teachers are women. Trash collector is a job that requires nothing but the willingness to empty trash cans into a truck. For a variety of reasons, most trash collectors are men. If a first-year trash collector earns more than a first year teacher, that's not a "problem", it's the free market. Teachers get the summer off, they get nifty benefits, and rock-solid job security, while they work in air-conditioned comfort. Trash collectors have dreadful working conditions. Because of this, it's harder to hire trash collectors than it is to hire teachers. The free market solves this problem with money. For the right price, someone will collect trash.
I agree that a male and female trash collector should make the same money if they do the same job and have the same seniority. But gender equity proponents are not easily confined to the realm of common sense. The only way to solve the gender equity issues of teachers vs. trash collectors is to convince enough female teachers to quit and enter the sanitation industry.
The real challenge is to persuade a generation of women to be as money-hungry as most men are. If you can get a job that pays more, take it. If you know in advance the working conditions will suck, be a hard-line negotiator and ask for more money. When too many people in one group are willing to sacrifice money for pleasant working conditions, it becomes easy for employers to take advantage of the entire group. Government action is not a substitute for group members standing up for themselves.
Woman paid more than man in most cases?
Hahahahahaha!
Women's pay to overtake men's by 2020
Women’s pay will overtake men’s within a decade if current trends in the labour market continue, new figures from the Government show.
http://www.mercurynews.com/op...