Today, Equal Pay Day, marks how far women, on average, have to work into 2010 to be paid the same as men were paid in 2009. In other words, women have to work almost 16 months — nearly four months longer than men do — to make the same amount of money. This is because women who work full time still earn, on average, 77 cents for every dollar men earn. This day is an important reminder of this ongoing problem, but not one we want to continue "celebrating" year after year.
When people hear about the sex-based wage gap, they are often surprised. After all, the Equal Pay Act was passed in 1963 — so why does the difference continue? Unfortunately, the Equal Pay Act has not worked as Congress originally intended. In many instances, the pay disparity exists because of ongoing discrimination, the lingering effects of past discrimination, and inadequate tools and remedies to do something about it.
Besides being unfair, the existence of pay disparities depresses the wages of single-female households and the working families who rely on the salary of all family members to make ends meet. The wage gap also undermines women's retirement security, which is often based on earnings while in the workforce. According to the congressional testimony of economist Evelyn Murphy, chronic wage discrimination can deprive a woman of between $700,000 and $2 million over her career. This figure grows when the loss of pension and social security benefits is included.
The stark reality for many women is that this difference in pay is a basic survival issue. According to the National Women's Law Center's calculations, more than 15.1 million women — about one in eight — are living below the poverty level. In 2008, women were 35 percent more likely to live in poverty than men. President Obama said it well when he noted that equal pay often means:
the difference between affording the mortgage — or not; between keeping the heat on, or paying the doctor bills — or not. And in this economy, when so many folks are already working harder for less and struggling to get by, the last thing they can afford is losing part of each month's paycheck to simple and plain discrimination.Modifications and improvements to the Equal Pay Act are necessary to ensure effective protection against sex-based wage discrimination in the workplace, and to provide women with the tools necessary to realize the decades-old promise of equal pay for equal work.
A bill, which has passed the House of Representatives and is currently pending in the Senate, would do just that. The Paycheck Fairness Act (S. 182) would address the shortcomings of the Equal Pay Act in several ways. It would finally close loopholes in the law by requiring employers to show that any wage differences between employees performing the same work must be based on legitimate reasons unrelated to the employees' sex. In addition, the bill prohibits retaliation against employees who inquire about their employer's wage practices or disclose their wage information to other employees. And the bill levels the playing field by ensuring that women who are discriminated against in the workplace can obtain the same remedies as those who suffer from discrimination based on race or national origin. Finally, the Paycheck Fairness Act would also improve data collection about pay disparities and provide training and technical assistance to both employees and employers alike.
While today marks the 16 months that it takes a woman to earn a man's yearly pay, today also marks the almost 16 months it has been since the House of Representatives passed Paycheck Fairness Act. Unfortunately, the Senate is yet to schedule a vote. There can be no better to way to mark Equal Pay Day than for the Senate to help end this injustice and pass the Paycheck Fairness Act now. The Senate has the chance to make "celebrating" Equal Pay Day obsolete.
Maddy Dychtwald: Women Peace Prize Winners Band Together to Help Others
What if all living women Nobel Peace Prize winners banded together to promote the role of women in creating a more peaceful world? Their combined connections could do so much.
Ashley B. Carson: Equal Pay Day - The Impact Over a Lifetime
During past equal pay days I participated in bake sales where we sold cookies and brownies to men for $1.00 and to women for .75¢. To the irate men I would respond, "Yes, it is maddening -- if you feel this way about a cookie, think about how we feel over a lifetime."
There are hundreds of studies and reports by everyone from the AAUW(a womens group) to the department of labor(which actually uses controlled variables, like any real study would do) and they all have determined that the cause is simply womens personal decisions and when you do an honest compared analysis the pay gap shrinks to a few cents, ie statistically insignificant.
Ask yourself this, if you were a CEO/manager/small business owner and you could hire a woman to do the same work for less why would you ever hire a man?
looked at graduate pay and determined there was no gender difference after accounting for time spent with family instead of in paid labor.
Do we really want parenting to become a luxury?
A 2007 AAUW report looked at two groups (college graduates 1-year and 10-years out) and determined that most of the pay disparity could be explained by "job and workplace, employment experience and continuity, education and training, and demographic and personal characteristics." They assumed by a process of elimination that the remaining difference ($0.88 or $0.95) was due to discrimination. A 2009 Dept. of Labor report looked at all workers and found that after considering total job compensation (wage plus health insurance and other benefits), work experience, job tenure, occupational differences, and industry differences, women earned $0.93 to $0.95 that men earned in wages. They could not deduce that the difference was due to discrimination as the data couldn't distinguish between that and several other possibilities.
A 2009 Univ. of MI Law School study & a 2008 study of MBAs at the University of Chicago, looked at graduate pay and determined there was no gender difference after accounting for time spent with family instead of in paid labor.
The pay disparity has consequences & we should look at means to address it. However, if the Paycheck Fairness Act is based on an incorrect analysis of the situation it will fail.
I do think your question does point to an interesting question, do people in different classes experience the gender pay gap differently? The University of Michigan and University of Chicago studies actually suggest that among their law school and MBA graduates, respectively, there is no gender pay gap. Rather people who interrupt their careers and work less, earn less. It would be useful to look at other groups to see if that holds up.
Another important question that I wish Vagins or others would address is whether the gender pay gap taken alone is a valid metric for gender equality. There appears to be a clear trade-off between wages and family time. One could argue that men are disadvantaged by family time and family decision making gaps and that in our society that gap is a far more intractable issue as it is supported by a myriad of cultural expectations, workplace rules, laws, and family court traditions. Need a number?... men make 25 cents worth of the economic decisions in the household for every $1 women make. The next Presidential election will be over by the time men experience "Equal Household Economic Decision Day".