The C is for Crank
Republicans Block Paycheck Fairness Act
Republicans in the US Senate just blocked a vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would have ensured that a law on the books since 1963---the Equal Pay Act---is adequately enforced. Not one
Senate Republican voted for the act. Not one.
The paycheck fairness act would have been a small first step at addressing the persistent gap in pay between men and women in the US. Currently, women earn 77 cents, on average, for every dollar earned by men. Over time, the gap adds up: Over 40 years of paid employment, that adds up to an average wage loss for women of $434,000 ($713,000 for college-educated women). Only 59 percent of that gap can be explained away by factors Republicans like to call "lifestyle choices"---things occupation, industry category, job experience, union status, and race.
I'll get to why many of those "choices" aren't really choices in a minute, but first, in case you think the law is some radical-feminist plot to take jobs away from men, unleash a flood of frivolous lawsuits, or impose communist-style wage controls on employers, here's what the act would actually do:
• Require employers to state a "business justification" for paying women less than men to do the same work;
• Make it easier for employees to get salary information without retaliation from employers;
• Create negotiation skills training programs for women and girls (one reason for the pay gap is that women are socialized to ask for, and accept, less than men, and men are socialized to demand more).
In a righteous statement this morning, US Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), a co-sponsor of the act, said she was "extremely disappointed that Senate Republicans blocked this common-sense legislation to close the pay gap and help women and families in Washington State and across the country. This issue shouldn’t be controversial, and it shouldn’t be political: it should be about right and wrong. And it’s simply wrong that women only earn 77 cents for every dollar paid to men, and that so many women doing the same job as men are earning significantly less."
Why do women make less than men? Republicans tend to attribute the wage gap to women's "choices"---things like having children, failing to pursue advanced degrees, and choosing traditionally "female" occupations like nursing, teaching, and child care.
What Republicans don't like to acknowledge is that none of those choices occurs in a vacuum.
First, women are often expected to give up wages if they decide to have children---either by staying at home (a decision that, paradoxically, makes "sense" because women usually earn less than their male partners) or by reducing their hours or going to part-time work. Women are less likely than men to have jobs that offer them the flexibility to take care of their kids. And the US, which guarantees just 12 weeks of unpaid leave, ranks dead last among all nations in its maternity leave policy.
Even women who do work more or less continually while having children fare worse in the workplace than men. According to a recent Cornell study, job applicants who identify themselves as mothers are perceived as being less competent, less promotable, less likely to be recommended for management, and are likely to be offered lower starting salaries than men with identical levels of education and work experience.
Second, society places a lower value on jobs like nursing and teaching than it does on blue-collar jobs that require similar or less education and training, like carpentry, truck driving, and plumbing. The legacy of hundreds of years of discrimination against women is that "women's work" remains undervalued. There's nothing "natural" about the fact that a zookeeper makes more than a child care worker. Biases can be conscious or unconscious, but they add up to real impacts---in women's case, 33 cents on the dollar.
Third, women go into this work environment---one in which their work is already undervalued---without the skills to ask for what they're really worth. A study by the Association of University Women found that, controlling for type of college, grades, type of job, and type of choices about marriage and kids, women earn five percent less than their similarly educated male peers. Ten years later, those women are earning 12 percent less. Straight-up discrimination is clearly a factor here (as is the fact that employers rightly assume that most women will eventually become mothers, and see them as a less reliable investment) but so is socialization: Women are taught to ask for less. Here's a good interactive graph that illustrates the wage gap by profession.
Women need more than just a law saying we can ask our bosses what our male counterparts make. We need paid maternity leave, incentives for employers to offer flexible work environments, education on gender discrimination, and a wholesale shift in our societal values. That's to start. But first, we need a paycheck fairness act. Even though we didn't win this time, I'm glad I have folks like Murray in Congress fighting for me.
The paycheck fairness act would have been a small first step at addressing the persistent gap in pay between men and women in the US. Currently, women earn 77 cents, on average, for every dollar earned by men. Over time, the gap adds up: Over 40 years of paid employment, that adds up to an average wage loss for women of $434,000 ($713,000 for college-educated women). Only 59 percent of that gap can be explained away by factors Republicans like to call "lifestyle choices"---things occupation, industry category, job experience, union status, and race.
I'll get to why many of those "choices" aren't really choices in a minute, but first, in case you think the law is some radical-feminist plot to take jobs away from men, unleash a flood of frivolous lawsuits, or impose communist-style wage controls on employers, here's what the act would actually do:
• Require employers to state a "business justification" for paying women less than men to do the same work;
• Make it easier for employees to get salary information without retaliation from employers;
• Create negotiation skills training programs for women and girls (one reason for the pay gap is that women are socialized to ask for, and accept, less than men, and men are socialized to demand more).
In a righteous statement this morning, US Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), a co-sponsor of the act, said she was "extremely disappointed that Senate Republicans blocked this common-sense legislation to close the pay gap and help women and families in Washington State and across the country. This issue shouldn’t be controversial, and it shouldn’t be political: it should be about right and wrong. And it’s simply wrong that women only earn 77 cents for every dollar paid to men, and that so many women doing the same job as men are earning significantly less."
Why do women make less than men? Republicans tend to attribute the wage gap to women's "choices"---things like having children, failing to pursue advanced degrees, and choosing traditionally "female" occupations like nursing, teaching, and child care.
What Republicans don't like to acknowledge is that none of those choices occurs in a vacuum.
First, women are often expected to give up wages if they decide to have children---either by staying at home (a decision that, paradoxically, makes "sense" because women usually earn less than their male partners) or by reducing their hours or going to part-time work. Women are less likely than men to have jobs that offer them the flexibility to take care of their kids. And the US, which guarantees just 12 weeks of unpaid leave, ranks dead last among all nations in its maternity leave policy.
Even women who do work more or less continually while having children fare worse in the workplace than men. According to a recent Cornell study, job applicants who identify themselves as mothers are perceived as being less competent, less promotable, less likely to be recommended for management, and are likely to be offered lower starting salaries than men with identical levels of education and work experience.
Second, society places a lower value on jobs like nursing and teaching than it does on blue-collar jobs that require similar or less education and training, like carpentry, truck driving, and plumbing. The legacy of hundreds of years of discrimination against women is that "women's work" remains undervalued. There's nothing "natural" about the fact that a zookeeper makes more than a child care worker. Biases can be conscious or unconscious, but they add up to real impacts---in women's case, 33 cents on the dollar.
Third, women go into this work environment---one in which their work is already undervalued---without the skills to ask for what they're really worth. A study by the Association of University Women found that, controlling for type of college, grades, type of job, and type of choices about marriage and kids, women earn five percent less than their similarly educated male peers. Ten years later, those women are earning 12 percent less. Straight-up discrimination is clearly a factor here (as is the fact that employers rightly assume that most women will eventually become mothers, and see them as a less reliable investment) but so is socialization: Women are taught to ask for less. Here's a good interactive graph that illustrates the wage gap by profession.
Women need more than just a law saying we can ask our bosses what our male counterparts make. We need paid maternity leave, incentives for employers to offer flexible work environments, education on gender discrimination, and a wholesale shift in our societal values. That's to start. But first, we need a paycheck fairness act. Even though we didn't win this time, I'm glad I have folks like Murray in Congress fighting for me.
