Why can't "Equal Pay for Equal Work" Women/ Men answer my simple question?

Strange how we never hear this side of the story isn't it?

Equal Pay Hurts Working Women
http://www.policymic.com/arti...

Paycheck Fairness Act Will Hurt Women
http://www.usnews.com/debate-...

Equal Pay? More Like Special Payoffs to Trial Lawyers
http://www.publiusforum.com/2...

I knew the "Lily Law" was a payback before it was even a law.

Yes. I believe they hurt more than they help.

Another argument against this law was the fact that many women want to have flexibility in their hours so they can work and still be a Mom. That flexibility would be taken away with this law.

It's true. Most don't understand that they take the yearly salaries to get these figures. Women work less hours (for someone else) because they have to.

Or want to!

With a wife of 31 years, next month, and 5 sisters, I am one who knows and respects the "jobs" of a woman. None of them would ever sell themselves short, nor would they blame others for the life they have chosen for themselves.

This is what I think it boils down to.

I agree.

if they had started the same job they should be paid the same if a women has been there or a man been there on the job for lets say 5 years they should have had a few raises now if a man or women just starts they should make whatever the starting pay is not what that person that has been there a number of years is making .

But still, they are doing the same job.

they are but they just started the job therefore they get starting pay and still they have no time on the job or the experience and who knows if they will stay long enough to even get that first check.

And 6 months down the road when both employees are set in their routine, both doing the same job, is the one making less deserving of a pay hike equal to the employee making more. Same job, same out put?

that would depend on how the company gives it's raises ,because if that were to happen then the person who has been there and has been there everyday would probably be up for one to.I do see where you are coming from though.

I just feel these fair pay/equal pay laws are bogus, and serve only to separate. While they may serve to help some, they hurt more in the process. And they hurt the ones not deserving of it.

I agree.

I am for equal pay for the same job classification and the same work, providing that the worker's level of seniority, education, certifications, experience, and whatever else is identical to anothers, that is just a fair and honest earning basis. Otherwise, of course someone should make less without the seniority, education, certifications, experience and whatever else isn't up to that level of EARNING that same pay grade for those who have more (of all of that).

That said, I am vehemently opposed to someone with identical (all of the above) being paid less than someone doing the exact same work with (all of the above) simply because they are either a woman, gay, trans or whatever, or simply because the employer likes them less and doesn't want them in the good old boy's club.

But that may just be me...

Identical?

When does that ever really happen?

Probably not very often. However, I stand by what I said. If somebody wants the same pay-grade as somebody else in the same job classification, then they'd best be able to match that person's seniority, education, certifications, experience, and whatever else that is relevant and necessary to the job at hand - or else, they'd better be damn close.

If it almost never happens, why the need in a law?

You asked for answers, I gave you my opinion on the matter. Not even discussing the law. The point is that employers should not play favorites for frivalous reasons and throw lavish wages to some while keeping others that do and produce the same work, have the same qualifiactions and experience to offer, the crumbs. Their job is to ensure the rest of us have a job, provide us the environment in which to make a fair and honest living, to do our jobs, and nothing more. So if such a law will aid in that endeavor, then I'd have to support it. But the socialists believe that no matter who you are or what you do, you should get the same, flat pay rate as everyone else - and that is wildly different than the proposed legislation we're talking about now.

Do you honestly know what others make? And what business is it of yours? I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but really, why does it bother some so much, is it insecurity on their part?

Did I not already just explain this?

No, I don't believe you did.

I've read your responses a few more times, and still I can't find where you answered these two questions.

Do you honestly know what others make?

And what business is it of yours?

You missed my entire point. I'm not going to waste my time even trying to explain it all over again. I am not a teacher, it is not my job to hammer facts into people's heads who simply aren't capable of grasping a simple concept. That is why my last reply was simply...

I didn't miss the points you were trying to make, and I certainly do not expect you to be civil when denying to answer two simple questions.

One out of a million people "might" have the same "everything" and you support a law that would cripple individualism. pfft!

Equal pay for Equal work is the posted question. There is legislation going on right now. That is why you came here to reply in the first place. So, our conversation has ALWAYS been in reference to a LAW.
No two people are the same, no matter how much you want it to be that way. IT WONT HAPPEN.
IF you worked for me, you would get paid what you settle for. You would be paid fairly, but you would get what you settle for.

P.S. You still did not answer the two questions asked.

SH is an OPINIONS site. I have given you my OPINION more than once already. Drop it or I will be forced to exercise my rights to choose FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION and block you. I am sick of you needling and pricking me about this. You've been warned. Let it go. My OPINION is stated, it is MY OPINION. I am not arguing for or against a law, but again, HAVE STATED MY OPINION ON THE MATTER ALREADY.

You will be blocking a man who has shown you respect of your opinion throughout this conversation.

This is my question, and I have a right, a freedom, to answer, or give my opinion to anyone who replys here.

If you can't handle that, then maybe you should not reply.

But my guess is its not up to negotiation. Usually jobs have automatic raises so a senior employee will get more pay then a junior one.

Automatic raises? Never heard of that before.

Really? Quite common.

Give me one example. I'd like to look into this.

Warehouses, stockers, mechanics, cashiers....

So every so often employees in these industries give raises to everyone. Just like that, with no exceptions?

As long as the employee doesn't mess up yea. Its usually after a certain period of time has past. i.e. 6months then at 12 then at 24. It's not a major increase but incremental so it adds up.

I've looked around and asked around. I can't find anything like that except for the fiscal year pay raise the Military gives out.

I did find however employee evaluations for raises, which requires employer approval of raises.. but they are not automatic.

Everyone has the right to negotiate their own salary.