iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Sarah Damaske

GET UPDATES FROM Sarah Damaske
 

The Paycheck Fairness Act: A Step in the Right Direction

Posted: 06/04/2012 1:04 pm

On Tuesday, June 5, Congress will vote on the Paycheck Fairness Act, a bill designed to strengthen the Equal Pay Act, which President Kennedy signed into law in 1963, "making it illegal for employers to pay unequal wages to men and women who perform substantially equal work." At the time, the average full-time, year-round female worker earned made approximately 59 cents for every dollar an average full-time, year-round male worker. By 1996, the difference was 73.8 cents to the dollar. But today, the difference is about 77.4 cents. Not a terribly huge improvement over the last 16 years.

I wrote about this topic this past April in honor of Equal Pay Day, a day started in 1996 to bring attention to the pay differential between men and women. I received a lot of comments stating that women simply "choose" to make less than men by working in less well-paying fields or taking time off to care for children. But as many other work-family scholars have noted, these explanations just don't cut it.

The Paycheck Fairness Act addresses the issue of when women and men are paid differently for doing the exact SAME job. And 2006 research by notable economists Francine D. Blau & Lawrence M. Kahn shows that gap between men's and women's wages has not changed much in recent years and much of the wage gap cannot be explained by differences in occupations or in human capital (what researchers call the education and skills that people develop in order to get their jobs).

Moreover, recent research shows that women in a variety of fields, including the law, engineering, science, and traditionally female fields, like teaching and nursing, make less than men even when they work the same number of hours in the same job. So, even in the same position, working the same number of hours, women most often make less than their male counterparts. It seems very unlikely than these women are "choosing" these lower salaries.

Differences in pay are likely connected to bias, particularly about men's and women's roles at work and at home. Having children often increases men's wages, according to research from sociologist Rebecca Glauber, but it often decreases women's wages and women working in low-wage jobs face the toughest wage penalties for motherhood, as sociologists Michelle Budig and Melissa Hodges found. After Wisconsin repealed its Equal Pay Law, Wisconsin state senator Glen Grothman argued that "money is more important for men." When he said this, he may have been tapping a generally unspoken belief -- that a woman's salary is less necessary to her family than is her spouse's. But, these beliefs are a remnant of times gone by in which men were primary breadwinners and women were primary homemakers (although as historian Stephanie Coontz has noted, even during the 1950s, this gender divide was never as big a phenomenon as we remember it to be).

Today, only 20 percent of children are raised in families with a traditional breadwinning father and stay-at-home mother. Most children, then, live in families that depend on the wages of women, and one-third of children live in single-mother households and are most at risk of living in poverty. The National Women's Law Center reports that bridging the gender wage gap would give the average full-time working woman's family the money to pay for an additional 4 months' supply of groceries, 5 months' of childcare, 3 months' rent and utilities, 5 months' health insurance premiums, 4 months' student loan payments and 5 tanks of gas. Addressing the wage gap would go a long way in increasing women's economic security, as well as the financial security of their families.

In 2010, no Senate Republicans voted to consider the Paycheck Fairness Act. In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker, up for a recall election this week, repealed Wisconsin's Equal Pay law. President Obama has now come out forcefully in support of the Paycheck Fairness Act. As both President Obama and presidential hopeful Governor Mitt Romney continue to vie for women's votes, it would be nice to see Governor Romney join him and lend his full support to the passage of this important bill.

 
 
 

Follow Sarah Damaske on Twitter: www.twitter.com/sarahdamaske

FOLLOW BUSINESS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 21
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Black Rhino
10:26 PM on 06/04/2012
This is exactly the type of regulation which is unnecessary, and dumb.

Negotiate your wage...you get what you deserve . If you think you're worth more, go find an offer. If you can't, you're not worth 'more'.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff Thompson1
07:02 PM on 06/04/2012
I did hiring for a fortune 500 company for years and year, one of the key differences between hiring a man and a woman is this : Men negotiate harder for a better starting salary, and men negotiate harder for raises - they are willing to take risks in demanding more money both starting and in demanding raises. Women are much much more likely to roll-over or take a first offer. There ARE gender differences that account for different behaviors. I think it might help if we recognized these differences - perhaps young women could be taught to be more assertive / more confrontational --- or perhaps even how to negotiate better. Women are more security minded - period. There is a clear biological and evolutionary basis for this. Primitive man had to take more risks to succeed - primitive women were security conscious for the purposes of child rearing / protecting young.
09:46 PM on 06/04/2012
Many women who take risks are seen in a negative light.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/29/AR2007072900827.html
This is just one example. Just curious (not an accusative question, mind you, just food for thought), what was your perception of women who did negotiate hard?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff Thompson1
07:30 AM on 06/05/2012
I respected them more for sure, and felt they made better employees, because I knew they would not be afraid to negotiate harder on behalf of the company.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
J Rupel
"Let the lamp affix its beam..."
12:50 AM on 06/05/2012
Nah, let's just have more lawsuits.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff Thompson1
07:30 AM on 06/05/2012
I don't understand your comment. This bill would increase the number of lawsuits.
05:48 PM on 06/04/2012
I gotta say that if it was true that women get 73 % of what men get for exactly the same work, a few women could get together, hire women and pay 85% and drive every other company out of business. Either there is something wrong with the data or there is the opportunity of a lifetime.
04:36 PM on 06/04/2012
‎I willn't be fooled nor bribed by Obama. "It is easy to be conspicuously 'compassionate' if others are being forced to bear the cost." -Murray Rothbard
04:45 PM on 06/04/2012
You bet that Obama wants us women paid more, so we can pay for those illgal wars he has been committing.
09:48 PM on 06/04/2012
How do you commit a war?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnDonohue
04:29 PM on 06/04/2012
Did you ever notice these two things:

1) despite their High Collectivist current beliefs, many liberals "read Ayn Rand" when they were young and idealistic, and "got it."

2) now that they have turned to the dark side, they cannot help giving their collectivist laws names that sound as if straight out of the pages of Atlas Shrugged

Of course, Miss Rand would probably blanch at the prospect of naming something "The Paycheck Fairness Act." Too on the nose.
04:22 PM on 06/04/2012
A step in the wrong direction. This is going to lead to women being less likely to be hired because companies will now have to spend extra time proving disparities in paychecks.
06:54 PM on 06/04/2012
Most liberal tactics aimed at "helping" people really ends up hurting people. The Civil rights act of 1991 was for votes and publicity however it has made hiring minorities a liability to companies =\ funny how people just sign up for laws and bills that promise them more money and more opportunities are the ones hurt most....except for the politicians who keep reciting how this will do good for them =\
DrinkerOfTheRye
Eschew obfuscation
02:55 PM on 06/04/2012
Of course no Senate Republicans voted to consider the Paycheck Fairness Act in 2010. The whole party has declared a War on Women. I'm glad that the president has put their regressive intransigence onto his "kill list". In the military and in civil-service, the Government has a very rigid pay system that eliminates opportunity for any significant merit-based raises, thus assuring equal pay. This act is just one more step in the progressive march to an egalitarian society. Fair pay is even more important in our flattening economy where the one percenters have lowered our standard of living. Pressure you Congressman today and remind him that Barack has his do-nothingness in his drone sites. FORWARD.
01:54 PM on 06/04/2012
Women's 77 cents to men's dollar.

The statistic does NOT mean women are paid less than men in the same jobs. Nor does it mean that every woman earns 23% less than every man, perhaps leading some of the more benighted and the blinkered ideological to believe Diane Sawyer of ABC News earns less than the young man walking back and forth on the street wearing a “Pizzas $5” sign.

The figures are arrived at by comparing the sexes' median incomes: women's median is 77 percent of men's. In 2009, the median income of full-time, year-round workers was $47,127 for men, compared to $36,278 for women or 77 percent of men's median. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/217/womens-earnings-and-income

Median means 50% of workers earn above the figures and 50% below. That means that a lot of female workers in the higher ranges of women's median make more money than a lot of male workers in the lower ranges of men's median.

“Women's 77 cents to men's dollar” doesn't account for the number of hours worked each week, experience, seniority, training, education or even the job description itself. It compares all women to all men, not people in the same job with the same experience.

More at "Will the Ledbetter Act Help Women?" at http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-pay-act-help-women/
02:05 PM on 06/04/2012
Totally
03:45 PM on 06/04/2012
Oh there you go quoting real facts, gosh darn, now you know liberals are not capable of recognizing facts.
06:51 PM on 06/04/2012
I am a recently employed guidance counselor with a degree from state school and i want to be payed as much as a wall street exec with 30 years experience and a degree from harvard! Obama2012! he will take the money from those evil men and distribute it to us women! and then i will demand that my husband pay for the mortgage and dinner as well! I am liberal and stupid =D