Republicans block 'Paycheck Fairness Act'

[Beany]

I work in an engineering field. I have been doing this around 30 years. I happen to be self employed and have been for years, but I do remember the times working "in house".

I knew a few women in our trade that were every bit as well paid as men of the same experience level. It wouldn't be right to pay someone with 15 years experience as much as someone with 20 years exp...so on and so forth...regardless what age, sex or race they are.

There has to be a system of actually paying people what they are worth. Perhaps discrimination is rampant in some fields, but not the ones I have been exposed to throughout my professional career.

This is a big iron fist in a silk glove...it will ruin some companies...it will ruin workplace morale with people p!ssing and moaning about who makes what...it will stop some people from going into business, why bother when you can't even control your own payroll....Kinda hard to get equal pay when no one wants to run a business anymore because of government interference.

People bark for things all the time and act like it's a gigantic behemoth that requires the dragonslaying power of the gov to intervene...when it's really not that bad, the records show this and it's getting better. But once you invite the GOV in...there is no getting rid of them.

So you're saying that gender discrimination should stay in place, that employers should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of gender? It's called equal pay for equal work. I can't see how it would lead to p***ing & moaning by anyone other than employers who cut costs by paying women less. As far as I know, in those places where equal pay for equal work was institute, there was no p***ing & moaning, nor did morale suffer; in fact, quite the opposite. One of the roles of government is to monitor discrimination on a national basis, and I think that's an appropriate role for them. After all, if there weren't discrimination, there would be no need for government intervention, would there?

[Beany]

Okay, and no reason minority men should be paid less than white women.

But employees can sue employers for discrimination; employers cannot sue employees for discrimination. Employers are already taking all the risk. And employers are the ones writing the checks while the employees are the ones cashing them. Something's wrong there. That we can play favoritism like this and then do one more thing for women and call it good?

Discrimination should be punished, period, not dolled out to the protective classes of ees and ies and women.

Why on earth would employers sue employees for discrimination when they're the ones holding all the cards, setting and enforcing policy, hiring & firing, etc.? And you're suggesting that righting a wrong should be delayed until all wrongs can be righted all at the same time, and that by addressing the issue of wage equality it's favoritism? No one wants to punish employers, women just want to be paid fairly based on the contributions they make and not on their gender.

When I participated in a comparable worth study of county employees, what we found was that male dominated jobs, like Greenskeeper, Maintenance Worker, Weights & Measures Inspector, had a salary range or step from one to six. Each year the guys received a step wage increase, from say step 3 to step 4, until they topped out at the last step, with the majority being at the highest step. In female dominated jobs with a step range of one to six, 90% of women were at step 2 and were never given a step increase above that. Approximately 10% or less were at step 3, which required an oral and written test and was considered a promotion, while the male-dominated positions did not require testing of any kind, and there wasn't even a step 4 or higher for female dominated positions. This is called wage bias, folks.

[Beany]

i do not get how fairness has anything to do with pay?? you negotiate your salary before you get hired, if you think you do not get pay you deserve find someone that will pay as much, that is if you actually deserve it, and not being buthurt when you find out somneone gets paid more. i used to have my own buissnes, hired people, no 2 people are same, even if they do same job, there will be one that wil take his job more seriosly, come on time every day, and not bringt his problems to work, and for that he\she deserves more than someone that does same job, but is not as reliable and responcible.

no 2 people are equal when it comes to work performance, why should they get equal pay?? lately these "women rights" activists, i assocate with al shapron.

The bill addresses institutionalized gender bias and discrimination. "Women's rights" activists? Why the quotes? You're darn right I'm going to exercise my voice and my vote for women's rights, as will my daughter my granddaughter. There's fair competition then there's competition that's rigged, we're asking for a level playing field. Not just for women, but for everyone, right now the spotlight is on pay equity, and that's what this conversation is about,

[Render]

yeahh, Beany for president !

and thx for the clarification that this would indeed be possible to execute.

[Beany]

Anytime you see a bill with something like "fairness" in the title, it usually isn't. It's an attempt to get more government control in people's lives which is the wrong way to go. It vilifies those that are pro Constitution. Because "how can anyone be against *FAIRNESS*". It doesn't matter what else is in the bill. Bills are notorious for signing away freedoms.

Martin Luther King said "I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant"

I think he was saying that the trappings of government (void of truth and love) would not bring fairness or equality to the people, only people interacting with each other and becoming active and aware in politics will the evil be defeated. We can't renege on our responsibilities to each other and let government do everything for us. If we were engaged with each other, then men and women would all be fairly treated.

Given your first sentence, would this be true of a Civil Rights bill? Of the phrase "right to bear arms?" Animal rights? Equal access?

[Beany]

I'm struck by all the rhetoric here, which seems to be based on press reports instead of any substantive knowledge of the issue. I would hope that each of us would take the time to inform ourselves of the issues instead of relying on press reports or politician's statements and accepting those views as being either truthful or accurate.

[acidhead]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disparity_in_the_United_States

Check this graph out:

[acidhead]

Median weekly earnings of full-time wage and salary workers, by sex, race, and ethnicity, 2009.[1]

Edited April 11, 2014 by acidhead

[Mantis914]

The bill addresses institutionalized gender bias and discrimination. "Women's rights" activists? Why the quotes? You're darn right I'm going to exercise my voice and my vote for women's rights, as will my daughter my granddaughter. There's fair competition then there's competition that's rigged, we're asking for a level playing field. Not just for women, but for everyone, right now the spotlight is on pay equity, and that's what this conversation is about,

This is gender specific for women so what happens when men start falling behind and women hook each other up for jobs and raises? That's your fairness? Not that that would ever happen, right?? Haha, every place that I've worked at that had almost all women in admin., it was the women who would move forward and get raises while sitting on their asses gossiping and men would get knitpicking evaluations even after staying late and not getting paid for it or making sacrifices just to save their job.

I suggest we men need to get it together and start organizing because this is only the beginning of it...

[acidhead]

Posting using an android phone.... pic isnt coming out the way I intended.

[aztek]

The bill addresses institutionalized gender bias and discrimination. "Women's rights" activists? Why the quotes? You're darn right I'm going to exercise my voice and my vote for women's rights, as will my daughter my granddaughter. There's fair competition then there's competition that's rigged, we're asking for a level playing field. Not just for women, but for everyone, right now the spotlight is on pay equity, and that's what this conversation is about,

you can exsercise all you want, but me as a buissnes owner (well former one, but still) and a person that pays, i will pay you as much as you worth in my eyes, based on your abuility and responsibuility, i do not care about your gender or color. no 2 workers are the same, so why should i pay them the same? there is nothing wrong with playing field, justy some players are not as valuable as others.

but if you think you are underpaid because you are female, take me to court and prove it is about your gender, and not your performance. and if you fail you will be paying my lawyers fees.

you do not want leveled playfield, you want special priviliges just because you are female. there are plenty of females ceo, cfo, ..... that get paid just as much and more than males. so all this inequality nonsense is a myth, females have same rights as man. how about men have same rights when it comes to divorce? i can name dozens of things where females have more pull than men. do you wanna go there?

Edited April 11, 2014 by aztek

[acidhead]

While sought with good intentions laws like these result in creating more victims. Collectivism 101

...........But what would you expect when the representatives writing them are lawyers to begin with. Lawyers creating laws which result in more employment for lawyers! What a concept! Damn... there should be more trades people representing the people. I might find an increase in employment! (scratches head).... just kidding.... not to be taken seriously. .. serious... seriously mean that... joking... not serious

[acidhead]

Well... back to my gender neutral job! Equal pay is the only way! (smiley face)

[aztek]

i'm all for equal pay, your pay is equal to your worth, not to other people's pay.

[Not So Common Sense]

It seems to me that there is a vast amount of ignorance rampant amongst political rivals. Do not associate with your party, race, or sex just to go along with the flow. How politics make us stupid. (Ignore the climate change that is a whole different discussion) Think for yourself, research, read opposing views, and have an open mind. Each party has some good to add to the great equation which is America, along with many negatives. No party has all the answers and if they think they do, they are tyrants, plain and simple.

This bill had little to do with fair pay and much more to do with pushing the November elections. If it had passed the Democrats could hail their victory for women, and if it failed it was fodder for the democrats to demonize republicans. It was truly a win-win for the Dems and a loss for the rest of America.

“When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow.” Anais Nin

[spartan max2]

I always thought we already have anti discrimination laws?

Edited April 11, 2014 by spartan max2

[F3SS]

To beanys post about rights and fairness...

Those things don't have fairness in the title but often times things like civil rights obstruct the rights of others and come loaded with unfair policies. Instead of simply making blatant discrimination illegal things like affirmative action come into play. When filling quotas is more important than filling whatever it may be with a most qualified candidate civil rights not only becomes unfair but it is also insulting and filled with pity towards those it helps and instills zero pride that comes with earning your way on your own merits. I believe in animal rights to the extent that it doesn't impede on human rights and we'll being. Equal access is fine unless it is also more about political correctness than logic.

Edited April 11, 2014 by F3SS

[Mantis914]

you can exsercise all you want, but me as a buissnes owner (well former one, but still) and a person that pays, i will pay you as much as you worth in my eyes, based on your abuility and responsibuility, i do not care about your gender or color. no 2 workers are the same, so why should i pay them the same? there is nothing wrong with playing field, justy some players are not as valuable as others.

but if you think you are underpaid because you are female, take me to court and prove it is about your gender, and not your performance. and if you fail you will be paying my lawyers fees.

you do not want leveled playfield, you want special priviliges just because you are female. there are plenty of females ceo, cfo, ..... that get paid just as much and more than males. so all this inequality nonsense is a myth, females have same rights as man. how about men have same rights when it comes to divorce? i can name dozens of things where females have more pull than men. do you wanna go there?

There was only one thing I saw wrong with your statement: Females have the same rights as a man. Actually, females have more rights than a man does as a Protected Class and gets more of a benefit of the doubt in the public's eye.

This example right here is why Protected Classes need to be thrown out. You can't cry about equal rights and then claim superiority over another type of person...

[F3SS]

Exactly Mantis, those were the words I was looking for. Equal rights, civil rights, ect; grant rights above and beyond equality. If you want more rights than anyone in America being a gay female minority could automatically put you miles ahead of anyone in this country if you know how to play the game.

[Leonardo]

I heard somewhere that there was a component that demanded the right for someone to "check" on the salaries of others to make sure they were being paid the same.

That is an invasion of privacy. Everyone is an adult, you negotiate your own salary. I have worked places in the past where one person found out another person made a little more money than them and they acted like a fool over it...this did not help them close the gap by any means.

Just because person A is a better salary negotiator than person B...it does not mean person B can use person A as a scapegoat and a way to recover from being a crappy negotiator.

Just a question. How does being a "better salary negotiator" impact job performance?

Because surely it is job performance that determines how much a person is paid relative to another?

[aztek]

Just a question. How does being a "better salary negotiator" impact job performance?

Because surely it is job performance that determines how much a person is paid relative to another?

it does not impact your job performance, but it impacts your start salary, than after you show how you perform you may get raise, or not, or a boot. all in your hands.

idk about UK, but in USA salaries do not stay same all the time, people get raise, and can negotiate their salary every year, it does not mean they will get raise every year, but it ususaly happens.

Edited April 11, 2014 by aztek

[Gromdor]

Pay is all about salary negotiation rather than performance. Seen one contractor who had a secretary that made $30/hr to answer phones and a ton of construction workers that made minimum wage. I asked about that and his reply was that labor was a resource and if you can get it for below its value then it is prudent to do so. The secretary, however, was a family friend from church. Come to think of it, his wife was also on the payroll to basically do nothing.

[F3SS]

Just a question. How does being a "better salary negotiator" impact job performance?

Because surely it is job performance that determines how much a person is paid relative to another?

It doesn't but haggling for a higher wage can and does happen. From my pov as an employer, if someone successfully sells themselves to me for a higher wage I'm going to be that much more critical of everything they do. They may just sell themselves right out of the job because of it if they don't perform whereas if they'd have taken a lower wage I might be more lenient and they could've worked for me longer and earned more money at a lesser wage than they did for perhaps only three months at a higher one.

As for Jerimiahs 'salary check' comment, I once had an employee take it upon himself to check the wages of another by snooping through the others truck looking for a pay stub. His suspicions were conformed and the other certainly was making more and the snooper, like J said, acted like a damn fool from then on out. He quit on me soon enough which was ok because I wasn't going to deal with his bs much longer anyhow. It didn't end there though. The snoopers find and his following tirades lingered for a couple years after he was gone. Nothing angers me more than the guys discussing their wages. First off its none of each others business and second it creates animosity and bloated perceptions of self worth.

[Gromdor]

It doesn't but haggling for a higher wage can and does happen. From my pov as an employer, if someone successfully sells themselves to me for a higher wage I'm going to be that much more critical of everything they do. They may just sell themselves right out of the job because of it if they don't perform whereas if they'd have taken a lower wage I might be more lenient and they could've worked for me longer and earned more money at a lesser wage than they did for perhaps only three months at a higher one.

As for Jerimiahs 'salary check' comment, I once had an employee take it upon himself to check the wages of another by snooping through the others truck looking for a pay stub. His suspicions were conformed and the other certainly was making more and the snooper, like J said, acted like a damn fool from then on out. He quit on me soon enough which was ok because I wasn't going to deal with his bs much longer anyhow. It didn't end there though. The snoopers find and his following tirades lingered for a couple years after he was gone. Nothing angers me more than the guys discussing their wages. First off its none of each others business and second it creates animosity and bloated perceptions of self worth.

That is a problem I have ran into a lot myself. The company I work for is multi-state and they have regional shop that have a crew of local union labor. Every once in a while we get a job that requires the manpower from more than one shop. Long story short, when you mix people from a union in Chicago with someplace like Sioux City, Iowa you get a lot of needless drama about pay. Smoothing things out is always a mess and always seems to end up with more money for the lower paid guys, threats of termination to the lower paid guys, or just plain separation and deceit about pay. None of these options sit very well with me or for the management of my particular shop so I always went for the straight up honest approach. I'd tell them how much they made, how much the other guys made and what exactly they needed to do to get the other guys pay. (That being, transferring to the higher paid area's shop and moving basically) Most of the guys calmed down and went back to work, but some actually took the offer. Those guys, the ones that were willing to drop their whole lives and move for the higher pay actually turned out for the better usually. They had the drive to do something more and did it.

[Wendigo Wangs]

The 77 cents myth has been regurgitated to death.

If if were true, why would any company continue to hire men?