Just a few months ago, the Supreme Court made a historical ruling impacting the future of pay discrimination in this country. The court, in a five to four decision, ruled in favor of retail giant Wal-Mart against a group of its female employees. Wal-Mart was facing a possible class action lawsuit on behalf of its female workers who were not promoted and were paid less than their male counterparts for similar work. Not only does the ruling make it more difficult for women, minorities and other discriminated groups to find justice in the courts, it weakens the legal case for equal pay for equal work in this country.
The fact remains that in 2011, women, as a whole, still earn less than men in the United States. According to the most recent statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, women who work full-time earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn. For women of color, the numbers are worse. African American women only earn approximately 61 cents and Latinas only 52 cents for each dollar earned by a white man.
On a state-by-state basis, the numbers show an even more telling story. In Illinois, on average, a woman working full time is paid $37,841 per year, while a man working full-time is paid $49,336 per year. This creates a wage gap of $11,495 -- money that could be used to purchase food, housing and rent for these women and their families. Over a lifetime, this wage disparity costs the average woman and her family $700,000 to $2 million in lost wages, impacting Social Security benefits and pensions. As the CEO of an organization committed to providing economic opportunities for women, I find these numbers simply unacceptable.
Many critics believe pay differences between men and women are simply a matter of personal choices, like women choosing to take time off to raise children. Research proves otherwise. In 2007, The American Association of University Women (AAUW) addressed this argument in a study that analyzed earnings data for female and male college graduates one year and 10 years after college graduation. The organization found that just one year after graduation, women earned only 80 percent of what their male counterparts made. Ten years after graduation, women were earning even less -- 69 percent of what men earned.
When we think of how far we've come with women's rights -- ensuring women's right to vote, reproductive justice and equal protection under the law from harassment, it can be easy to feel complacent. It can be easy to look at the progress we've made and feel reassured that someday we will eventually reach the goal of full pay equality. However, what we often fail to calculate in this equation is the work that was done to get us to this point -- the marches, the calls, the meetings, the letters. And in my opinion, it's time to begin working again.
One of the key ways to change this disparity is to educate individuals about the issue of pay inequity. In an effort to create a dialogue surrounding this issue, organizations have created events including the national Equal Pay Day, which serves as a day to hold coordinated activities to raise awareness about how to address wage inequity. Last April, the YWCA joined fourteen other organizations and government agencies to sponsor an Equal Pay Day rally in Daley Plaza. And though the rally was a tremendous success, efforts like Equal Pay Day can be only the beginning in addressing this issue if we truly want to achieve pay equity in this country.
To develop a legal precedent, especially in light of the Supreme Court's ruling, we need to ensure passage of the Paycheck Fairness Act to provide future protection against pay inequities in the workplace. The Paycheck Fairness Act, currently being considered by Congress, expands the Equal Pay Act of 1963. The bill, which was reintroduced to the both the House and the Senate this April after failing to pass in the Senate in 2010, makes it easier for individuals who are victims of wage discrimination to address the issue. The Paycheck Fairness Act would do the following:
• Allow victims of gender wage discrimination to receive damages.
• Make it easier for individuals who are victims of wage discrimination to file class action lawsuits.
• Prevent punishment of employees who share salary information with co-workers.
• Tighten employer rules concerning defense of a gendered pay differential.
Many organizations are taking a lead on helping to organize our efforts. Women Employed, headquartered in Chicago, is a leading national advocate for women's economic advancement and is helping equal pay supporters petition Congress. And the National Committee on Pay Equity is working to increase individual awareness and reaching out to legislators to educate them about these issues. Working together, we will eventually reach a place where equal pay is synonymous with equal work in this country. My hope is that it happens much sooner rather than later.
Follow Christine Bork on Twitter: www.twitter.com/YWCAChicagoCEO
Perhaps you're not undervalued.What then?
Corwin.Just a Really Smart Person who's trying to help you think
You need to make a case that proves real discrimination because in 2011 it does not make sense culturally or in a world with nearly have if management being female along with most HR departments.
Feminist need to get out of the habit of assuming men or society owes them something. Women are more than half of the population but feminist insist women see themselves like weaker women of the past. This generation is not trapped at home and they are not uneducated or ignorant. They have been enjoying equality for decades and are now the majority of the work force along with the overwhelming majority of those earning degrees. On average young women make more than men. I suppose those few men with degrees might make more but more women have good jobs than men. Equality does not mean men and women will do the same things because there is still more pressure on men to make money and on women to carry children. Statistically you are better off being a young female today.
I think it's time feminist start worrying about how to get their sons to graduate at the same rate as their daughters. The girls are doing fine.
But you make an interesting comment: young woman. Young woman grow up (to someone like you that would be about age 30!) and they have bills to pay --but when they are not young anymore they are lucky to have a job --much less equal pay. Working woman aren't asking for any handouts - just the SAME PAY FOR THE SAME WORK! Its 2011 for g-d sakes.
Then you say "there is more pressure on men to make money and on women to carry children." REALLY? there are no pressures for woman to carry children - they have to-there is no real choice because men CAN"T carry children!!! OMG 'the girls are doing fine" Ed you need to graduate!!!
as a Smart Person, I want to help you.A good friend an economist (That's someone who deals in economics) and a department chairmen in the same poses a question at,um Non Smart people who"reason' as you do.If an enormous corporation that want's to make money (And,they all do.it's their reason for existence.) and can get the same qualifications/talemnts/skills/intellect by hiring women,and at a much decreased cost,why would they hire a male?
I've known lots of people who work for corporations,and many are male.
So,......
And,for your own sake,capitalizing doesn't impress anyone as making your arguments more cogent.
TJ Watson,the long time (41 yrs) chair of IBM instructed his employees to have a 'Think' sign on the walls.Good advice
This debate has been going on for years and to me the answer is simple: Women who want to have families (with children in them) must begin seeking out men for partners who are willing to take the lead in child care -- staying home full time, working part time, or who have time flexible careers. Believe me they're out there and once women have the ability to focus on their careers and dad is focusing on the kids, the wage gap will evaporate.
Most of the time what I see is articles constantly talking about how everybody else has to accommodate women's choice to have children, typically resulting in raising the taxes of people who chose to not have children, creating invasive legislation for private employers or significantly raising the operating costs of a business.
Of course the downside is that women will have to suffer the daily exile from family that men have for the last 100 years, take financial responsibility for another adult (like men have for the last several decades), and expose themselves to the brutal family court system (like men have for the last few decades). These are the only choices women have to make to earn as much as
Until men can carry a fetus - you boys are going to have to "accomodate" woman carrying the babies. and having one is a family choice - for married couples not a womans'. Re: the brutal court system (sorry about your divorce!! bitter boy) but the family courts haven't been brutal for the last couple decades - there is no-fault divorce and again the woman is stiffed financially.
Female doctors and lawyers make less because of the specialties they choose.
And acttually generally speaking young women without children earn more than men.
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/reverse-gender-gap-study-young-childless-women-earn/story?id=11538401
And no -- not divorced, but many friends who are and the court system is incredibly biased against men.
I absolutely think a bachelor's in sociology or women's studies is a s valuble as one in electricasl engineering. (I'm sure you'd agree.0
But,unfortunately,Mean Mr Market doesn't.what can we do about this awful bias towards intellectually difficcult and useful majors?
Millions of wives still choose no pay at all. In fact, according to Scott Haltzman, author of "The Secrets of Happily Married Women," stay-at-home wives constitute a growing niche. "In the past few years,†he says at http://tinyurl.com/6reowj, “many women who are well educated and trained for career tracks have decided instead to stay at home.â€
Stay-at-home wives earn zero. How can they afford this while in many cases living in luxury? Because they're supported by their husband, an “employer†who pays them to stay at home.
If millions of wives are able to accept no wages, millions of other wives are able to accept low wages, refuse overtime and promotions, work part-time (“According to a study for the Centre for Policy Studies, only 12% of the 4,690 women surveyed wanted to work full time.†http://bit.ly/ihc0tl), take more unpaid days off, avoid uncomfortable wage-bargaining (http://tinyurl.com/45ecy7p) — all of which lower women's average pay. Women are able to make these choices because they are supported or anticipate being supported by a husband who must earn more than if he'd chosen never to marry. This is how MEN help create the wage gap.
“The Ledbetter Fair Pay Act†at http://tinyurl.com/pvbrcu