Comments on: Employee rights and responsibilities part 10: Same work, same pay

By: drew

drew — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:14:42 +0000

Right on, Cath. Well said.

By: Cath Lawson

Cath Lawson — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 22:33:01 +0000

Hi Andrew – It sucks that this still goes on. Folk who do the same type of job should be paid the same – regardless of gender, race, or anything else.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:08:55 +0000

Brad, I agree with your broader definition with respect to the concept of remuneration. The whole concept of remuneration can be somewhat more complicated than that of just straightforward salary and wages, and in looking at the question of gender based discrimination in remuneration practices, it is important to look at the whole range of benefits, monetary and otherwise, that employees receive as a result of their employment. Your point about the tendency for women to move in and out of the workforce raises an interesting point which I will talk about a little more in next week's post. Differing tendencies relating to different career or family related choices do affect impact the earning power of the average woman relative to that of the average man. There was one study interesting study back in 2007 where the researchers attempted to quantify the affects of such choices in an effort to determine whether or not a gender based pay gap remains after the impact of these types of choices. They did find that a small gender based gap remains, but more on that next week. Andrews last blog post..Employee rights and responsibilities part 10: Same work, same pay

By: Brad Shorr

Brad Shorr — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:59:50 +0000

Hi Andrew, Maybe it's worthwhile to expand the meaning of "remuneration" to include benefits. Depending on a person's family life, a lower salary in exchange for more vacation days or a more flexible work schedule would be an equitable exchange. In general, in the interest of fairness and to preserve peace within the firm, a policy such as you propose makes perfect sense. Again in general, women do move in and out of the work force more frequently, often due to family interests. When this occurs, I think it does affect the value of that employee, but you have to look at it on a case by case basis. To universally preemptively penalize women with a lower wage seems grossly unfair to me. Besides being unfair in principle, as a practical matter, the stereotype on which gender discrimination was based is long gone. These days we are seeing more men take on child rearing duties. Some parents are juggling two, three, or even four jobs to keep their heads above water. Brad Shorrs last blog post..Exciting New Resource for Chicago Entrepreneurs

By: Andrew

Andrew — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:04:04 +0000

Sorry Brad, I guess I was being somewhat lacksidasical in my use of terminology here, and I can see where there is potential for confusion. Basically, for the purposes of this post, I have used both terms to refer to salary or wages which one earns as an employee. I realize that the term 'earnings' can also be used to refer to profit from some form of business activity. But in this post, I am referring to the salary and wages of an employee when using both of the terms which you mention. Andrews last blog post..Employee rights and responsibilities part 10: Same work, same pay

By: Brad Shorr

Brad Shorr — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:13:47 +0000

Hi Andrew, Could you clarify - "I do not believe that our goal should be equality of the full time average weekly earnings for women to equal that of men. Instead, the goal should be that women and men who perform work of a similar nature, should be entitled to receive similar levels of remuneration." I don't understand the distinction between earnings and remuneration. Your post is very interesting, but before I comment, I want to make sure I understand more clearly. Thanks! Brad Shorrs last blog post..Exciting New Resource for Chicago Entrepreneurs