As my own career enters its latest phase, I am now in a position of being able to say what I want (which will never be as bad as Don Imus at any time of day), and to tell the truth whether the audience wants to hear it or not. And though that is true, when it comes to the wage gap issue, I am at a disadvantage because I'm a man. Still, I'm going to make an attempt to answer the question of whether there is a wage gap, and why women had better come to grips with the realities or lose something more precious than money, flexibility.
A Wage Gap or Politics? Nothing raises my hackles more than the resurrected bombardment of women's lib and politics for votes' sake are cries that there is a wage gap of up to thirty-seven percent between men and women working the same jobs. Sorry, ladies, but that is just plain hogwash. You're being played by Hillary Rodham Clinton and others with agendas, some as simple as selling books, magazines, and Web sites by preaching to the choir. It's true: nothing sells as well as ideas that you already believe and ideas that you want to believe.
Boston.com says, "If you are a woman working full time, you will lose between $700,000 and $2 million over your working lifetime -- just because of your sex... But today, 40 years later, the wage gap stands at 23 cents. Women working full time -- not part-time, not on maternity leave, not as consultants -- still earn only 77 cents to a full-time working man's dollar. That's an enormous gap, and it has been stalled in place for more than a decade. It's not closing on its own. It affects women at every economic level, from waitresses to lawyers, from cashiers to CEOs." (And right next to this is an is for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.)
I could end this article right now if you would all understand and agree that what all of these writers forget or purposely omit is that there is no disparity between men and women for the same work. Why is that so difficult to understand or believe? Maybe because the idea doesn't sell, and is rarely said. In my search, I've found two articles which pointed that out, but millions of books and articles emphasize a pay gap which doesn't exist.
Of these, none is more often quoted than the book, Getting Even: Why Women Don't Get Paid Like Men--And What to Do About It by Evelyn Murphy and E.J. Graff. Boston.com, Sen. Clinton, and more than 10,000 others have quoted, if not the content, then the title. After all, why read a whole book when the title alone makes your point?
So, with an election year coming up, just last month Sen. Clinton, while quoting Murphy and Graff and misquoting the U.S. Department of Labor stats, reintroduced the Paycheck Fairness Act, a piece of legislation that no one wants, but rings nicely in the ears of those that believe they are unfairly paid compared with men. The Paycheck Fairness Act gives the federal bureaucracy more power to make paychecks absolutely equal, whatever that means.
The point? Oh. Well, the first point is that women are paid less than men when you consider that the statistics are for the median wages for men and women. Why? Because women often take lower paying jobs than men. Women take more time off than men. No, they don't loaf. They take care of the kids, and boy that ain't loafing! They are the caregivers. (I'm a commiserator. That's the best I can do.) They not only want, but they need flexible hours and work schedules. And they're finally getting them with more and more companies allowing or simply giving flexible schedules. With women comprising more than half of the workforce, they have to. Society has changed. Families have changed. Roles have changed. Businesses had to change, too. However, all this can change back if we're not careful.
If the Paycheck Fairness Act goes through, you might kiss flexibility and jobs goodbye.
Credit Where Credit is Due: I began writing this article last week (and last year, and the year before that). I was stuck on a number of points. I knew that even the DOL was talking about median wages when they gave the "thirty percent less" statistic, and I knew that I was angry every time someone like Oprah or, much worse, Rosie O'Donnell spouted the party line. But why did it affect me so strongly? Maybe it was because it shouldn't be an issue after all these years. Women nurses and male nurses are paid the same. Women and male accountants and women and male bookkeepers are paid the same, though there are fewer male bookkeepers. And there are jobs where women actually make more than men in large part because there are more women - speech pathology for example - and go to the head of the line faster and more often.
My wife came in three paragraphs ago, and said, "I want you to read this!," meaning, "I want you to read this NOW!"
"I don't wanna."
"Read it. Here's somebody who agrees with you and explains what you've been trying to tell me for the last five years. She explains it. And she's right."
"But then I have to give credit to somebody else."
"And your point is?"
Carrie Lukas: Carry Lukas is VP for policy and economics at the D.C. based Independent Women's Forum and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism. Normally, anything called the "Women's Forum" would put me off, but any book title that starts with "Politically Incorrect Guide to Women" by a woman would make me curious. Besides, my wife ordered me. (And she had already emailed the article to our two daughters, so I had to catch up.)
Carrie Lukas had written a commentary about equal pay, and she hit the nail right on the head. She states:
"Government attempts to 'solve' the problem of the wage gap may in fact exacerbate some of the challenges women face, particularly in balancing work and family. Clinton's legislation would give Washington bureaucrats more power to oversee how wages are determined, which might prompt businesses to make employment options more rigid. Flexible job structures such as the one I enjoy today would probably become scarcer. Why would companies offer employees a variety of work situations and compensation packages if doing so puts them at risk of being sued?"
Ostensibly, if you want a wage gap, you can have one. All you have to do is to believe that there is one now and that your are being discriminated against because of sex. As I've said so many, many times before, there have been four Equal Pay Acts going back to 1864. They've actually worked. The rest is statistics and political hype. Understand when someone is taking advantage of you, and you'll survive a lot longer.
And now on to global warming about which I am totally confused, but at least it affects all of us.
Addendum, one week later- April 23, 2007: This is "sweeps week" for television. That means, put out your best stuff even if, in the news, you have to do an even better job of cheating.
I have cable. No big deal. 175 channels, 10 worth watching sometime. But I get WGN in Chicago and WGBH in Boston. Once in a while, even some stuff out of Denver and Dallas. Whatever. I get the NBC, CBS, and ABC stations, and what do you think they're reporting this week? Some woman is giving seminars across the country on why women are being paid 70 cents on the dollar (we lost a dime in a week) compared to men. Proof: two whole anecdotes, one having to do with bargaining and one having to do with expectations. Total people interviewed? Five. Premises: women don't bargain for more money when they go for a job, and men do, and second, women expect less because that's what they're taught as they are growing up. And there was a little comment thrown in about discrimination.
I suppose there's still some discrimination, but there's discrimination everywhere and for every reason. It's not as bad as the 60s. As for the other two premises, bull. No, not bull because women don't bargain. Bull because men are just as reluctant to bargain for salaries - especially for their first jobs - as women. Is anyone comfortable? Of course not. You think this is "The Apprentice?"
And expectations? Well, Ms. Whoever You Are, maybe you were taught to lower your expectations; maybe you got no support in your home; maybe you need assertiveness training (you're well past the age to have acquired it on your own), but I have proof that women have the same expectations as men in the same household, and maybe even in the same block in the same neighborhood. I know five people who were told and had examples to take from about getting the most that they could, that college was a stepping stone, and that they had to go for whatever they wanted. And so I have two very strong daughters, one who makes more than I and is a manager, and one who is an entrepreneur and started her own company. The other three? Friends' kids.
That doesn't count? It counts as much as the lack of statistics and anecdotal evidence as the networks are giving you. If anything, you should really be at the point where you trust no "evidence" presented in the news, perhaps no numbers either. I noted that when the networks talked about Toyota taking over the #1 spot from GM, they emphasized that that was just in the United States and that now that Toyota was growing so rapidly, they've had more recalls than GM. And that, my dear subscribers, is called "spin."
I read five papers a day, and when I'm done, I haven't the foggiest idea what's going on in the world. All I know is that it isn't good, but it's probably better than what I've been told. Bad news sells.