Today's sign that the recall election of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is as much about national politics as politics in Wisconsin comes from state Democrats' "Pocket Change" ad. Verbate:
"Equality? A dollar for him, 77 cents for her. Republicans say it's because money is more important for men. Even though she does the same work as him, she gets 23 percent less. And until Scott Walker's out of office, Wisconsin can't do anything about it."
Governor Walker signed away workers' right to sue in state court over unfair wages. The reference to money mattering more for men comes from Republican State Senator Glenn Grothman. He told the Daily Beast last month: "You could argue that money is more important for men. I think a guy in their first job, maybe because they expect to be a breadwinner someday, may be a little more money-conscious."
Leave a Comment:
WOW!!! And how many single mothers are in the work force trying to support their children? I would argue that women are a hell of a lot more concerned about being able to make a decent wage BECAUSE they will, more than likely, be solely responsible for the financial care of their children.
Call me surprised. Thanks Rach, for your segment about this last night. I think its hilarious how the Republicans thinking that loud-capping you would make their point more valid, and make you shut up.
Do they really think that these statistics are also false ones, and that modern researchers really don't know how to account for hourly workweek differences or inflation? Mind-numbing.
Maybe they think the facts are false because men are "better at math and science, and are naturally geared for breadwinning" and the women should just leave it up to the men and go back to baby-makin' and clothes-washin'.
No, but they do believe, rightly, that waving an exculpatory explanation (however bogus) in front of people will give the audience an excuse to dismiss the issue.
Wisconsin... get rid of this CANCER!! Equal pay for equal work.. and the right to sue over unfair wages!
Cute commercial. ^I'm so glad I'm not allowed to get married, none of that child support crap for me! (/snark)
Oh, don't you remember? That's not true! If you massage the numbers just right, and ignore whole career fields, and squint in the right way, and cover your liberal (that is, left) eye, you too can see the "truth" that women make as much, if not more, than men! (And if you believe that, I've got a few nice bridges to sell you...)
Republicans are making it very clear that women do not deserve their respect.
They have made it crystal clear. Let's punish women who get pregnant by taking away planned parenthood. Let's tell Rachel Maddow not to worry her pretty little head about that 77 cents on the dollar thing. Uh huh.
Republicans deserve to be whacked across the head with this issue for as long as it takes. This IS war, and they started it.
Yes, it is war. But, amazingly, it looks increasingly like they honestly don't understand the reality of what they are doing (which is the natural result of having heads stuffed full of false facts, I imagine).
'If you control for all factors... five cents more for men.' CNN looks at the facts and concludes that, there is still sexism. Is that a fact? Controlling for factors is, by definition, subjective. GPA is a factor. How do you weigh for that? If you are looking to make women get less money, you can weigh it like that. I guarantee that I could weigh it to make men 'make less.' Single women, under thirty, who work in cities make almost 20% more than men under thirty. For the past four years, that has been a fact. If white men were a targeted victim class, and I had been brainwashed to see my self as a victim of sexism, I would be very pissed off at that rampant anti-male sexism.
Now make allowances for the difference between having a BA and dropping out of the GED. Or for that matter felony history.
The one factor you didn't discuss on the show was the tendency of men to be more aggressive about negotiating starting salaries or demanding/requesting raises. Having been an employer who has faced this situation, I think giving Bob more than Ann just because Bob asked even though he and Ann do exactly the same job is a form of discrimination whether you intended it or not. If Bob gets a bump, Ann should get one too.
Oh believe me, Ann asks. And is told there is "nothing they can do." I got a salary bump once or twice and only then realized I was being paid a LOT less. You can be fired for discussing salaries.
Men don't get pregnant and take a couple months maternity leave every couple of years. If they did, then the disparity in wages would disappear.
Men also don't traditionally take care of family life- soccer practice, sick children, etc... which makes them able to put their families second and be the shining example of workaholic that demands that extra pay... doesn't make it right. If I'm giving 100%, and competing with a guy my same age who can give 110% because he doesn't have to be at the daycare by 5:30 to pick up the kids, there is no way for me to earn the same wage increases and support my family. I think it's especially valid to point out that female heads of household who receive little to no child support are on the increase.
Okay, but should the two of you be paid the same amount if that is the case?
Agreed. The biological and maternal/paternal differences get conveniently ignored in these equal pay demands. Even female managers practice this disparity of pay between the sexes. Men don't drop out of the workforce completely or for a decade after the birth of a child. So when a hiring manager has two equally promising young candidates, she will give the nod to the male candidate because she will not worry about him leaving for materiality leave or quit altogether in the near future after investing time and money unless of course she is legally compelled.
These guys truly don't get it. Either that or they have absolutely no shame. It amazes me that some women, gays, hispanics, blacks, or poor people can even consider voting for these types of Republicans. Clearly some people don't pay attention to what's going on and what these people vote on.
This whole concept of "Theres a perfectly logical reason these numbers look like this - its because they take less hours due to those silly emotions!" baffles the hell out of me.
Is... No one, anywhere, quite /getting/ that they're talking hour versus hour, not overall worked?
A brief partial re-post
If pay increases are based on a percentage of "base" salary, even a small difference in starting salaries will lead to big bucks after 20 years.
Answers are probably in the database - intelligent queries and analysis however are required. Is this analysis likely to come from politicians?
I still remember a state governor who was upset with student scores on a state-wide exam. He stated that he would not rest until all student scores were above average. (Not above the previous state average but above the next test average.) I'm still working on that - you have a low score and a high score and you average them ...
Adam_Selene