First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Obama to force Employers to disclose employee salaries
4056 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Online
Posted 1/29/16
Like many have said the main issue is taht differences in pay are for countless reasons. The job they work, how long they have worked it, and even how well they get along with their boss all can factor into their pay check. So trying to draw any conclusions from employers disclosing all of this is difficult unless the gap is too large to ignore.

On that note this new rule will make it hard for any employer to shamelessly exploit workers so overall it's a good thing. But I can definitely see a wave of bullshit statistics popping up "proving" black people or women or Japanese are universally discriminated against and payed less and the sheeple out there will just eat it up and go up in arms to "correct" the injustice while completely ignoring the possibility of there being reasons for the apparent pay gap.
22322 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Floridamned
Offline
Posted 1/29/16

PrinceJudar wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I guess you don't have faith in many politicians do you. Depressing. I don't blame you, me either.


I don't trust people in general.



Politicians are typically even worse than your average person.


Agreed. Most politicians are just a lot more experienced and educated at manipulating others than the average person. I don't believe Trump is an idiot at all. He's a respectable businessman. He knows how to work people perhaps even better than his competition. If you want to know what to expect from Trump as a president, then my best advice would be to analyze him before he started running almost exclusively. That idea of disregard is both disturbing and a bit analgesic if he does come to office.
18050 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
U.S.
Offline
Posted 1/29/16
previously in undercover boss...
47868 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16
From a governmental standpoint, how do we close the wage gap?

1) Declare that all workers with the same job (perhaps sorted by company or, worse, by occupation) must be paid equal amounts of money? If enacted, then workers can no longer ask for raises, because it would mean that pay would be unequal. However, even if this were enacted, the differences in job choice trends between men and women would probably still result in a wage gap. But, if you want to take power away from workers, then this is an excellent way to do it.

2) Declare that companies must hire equal amounts of men and women? This has a few problems. There's the obvious criticism that you're no longer hiring by merit, but by gender -- it may just so happen that the workers that would make you the most money or do the best work might end up skewed one way or the other. Classic affirmative action argument. But unlike racial affirmative action there's a more pronounced problem. It's still the case that there are less women working than men -- "stay-at-home mom" is still a thing, often desired by many women. Since all companies must have an even workforce by gender, this necessarily keeps jobs away from men who do want to work and build the economy, since there are women who don't want to work in an approximately evenly-gender-distributed working-age population. If the hiring quotas must be equal and the gender distribution is equal (this is approximately true, although men die quicker than women on average, so we do have a bit more females), then if a woman doesn't work (roughly) then a man, somewhere, is forced out of a job. You might consistently monitor the employment desires of men and women, and fix a percentage quota based on how many of each gender 'wants' to work, but I would guess this to be prohibitively expensive, to say nothing of intrusion of privacy and the necessary condition that the person you're asking will be honest. Either way, if you think unemployment and welfare is desirable, this is an excellent way to do it.

3) Control the workforce so that men and women must work in certain fields, whether they want to or not. So that, for instance, if we find a female high school student that has good grades in Math and Science, she is obligated to major in STEM, regardless of whether she's also a kick-ass painter. This one seems obviously stupid, but if you think fascism sounds great, this is an excellent way to do it.



Seriously, has anyone ever had a decent proposal for 'fixing' this 'problem' from a government standpoint? I can understand thinking there's a problem, for example, with women having cultural pressures to be meek and feminine (which might lead to not asking for a raise or not going into a more physical job, for instance), but that's a cultural issue that needs to be solved culturally. If it's a problem at all. I happen to think it is a bit of a shame, but it also seems to me that women are often quite happy, individually, going into lower-paid, more socially-oriented fields, regardless of whether culture is a big reason. They often choose those careers, and lest you forget, so do men. So, I don't even know if it's a 'problem' in the first place. I think it is, to an extent, but it's not something that we should solve by forcing it on our culture by way of government fiat.


That said, while I don't think people should be compelled by force to disclose how much money they make, I do think it's a good idea for workers to know how much their peers make. Adam Ruins Everything explained it pretty well:

Why You Should Tell Coworkers Your Salary
47868 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

What, you honestly expect people to employ blacks because hail capitalism? I sorely doubt THAT would happen immediately.


Well, in a manner of speaking, yeah. Companies that don't hire someone because of skin color are missing out on potentially great employees, whereas companies that only care about making money get better workers. But like you, I also sorely doubt that it would happen immediately, but if you know your history, you should know that it didn't happen immediately with government mandates. And I'll go one step further in saying that I don't think government intrusion did anything to help the problem, and in fact, government intrusion is part of what kept the problem going on in the first place (think segregation). What did have an effect was widespread social unrest, shifting of cultural paradigms, and public outcry. At every step of the way, culture is what has the biggest effect on change, while society drags the government kicking and screaming toward personal freedom. Culture is what elects officials and creates policy change, not the other way around. Government does shit nothing without a population backing it.
15742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 1/29/16

sarteck wrote:


descloud wrote:

As it stands we are terribly lacking in terms of job opportunities all across the United States. Degree or no degree, it seems to hardly make a difference these days.


This is actually quite true in my case. This job I've had for the past four years, when I went in to apply, I was telling the interviewer that yes, I did have a college degree and that I had a certificate in IT proficiency, and he didn't really give a shit. He just cared that I knew how to use Linux and could navigate sufficiently around the command line (things that I wasn't taught in any class).

In other words, he didn't care about my college credits, he only cared about me knowing WTF I was doing.


Basically your experience. This is what makes me not want to go to a four year after my associates. It doesn't seem like we are being taught anything relevant.

11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16

descloud wrote:


sarteck wrote:


descloud wrote:

As it stands we are terribly lacking in terms of job opportunities all across the United States. Degree or no degree, it seems to hardly make a difference these days.


This is actually quite true in my case. This job I've had for the past four years, when I went in to apply, I was telling the interviewer that yes, I did have a college degree and that I had a certificate in IT proficiency, and he didn't really give a shit. He just cared that I knew how to use Linux and could navigate sufficiently around the command line (things that I wasn't taught in any class).

In other words, he didn't care about my college credits, he only cared about me knowing WTF I was doing.


Basically your experience. This is what makes me not want to go to a four year after my associates. It doesn't seem like we are being taught anything relevant.



I'll say this...

When I bring people in I look for experience over "credentials." Most companies want that piece of paper and certs to back it up, but the ones usually worth working for prefer actual experience. Also, a degree in the IT field is mostly just to get people to look at you, not to hire you. Granted, when I got into the IT field I had a degree and certs to back it, I also had actual knowledge and proven skills that were relateable to the company.

If anything, get your certs over your degree. Those certs provide more pin pointed information most of the time. A degree is helpful of course and if you can you should always get it as well. Connections go a long way these days. I have a kid working under me with nothing more than a high school degree and proven experience. He didn't get his certs until later and we paid for those.

The HR depts and higher up tend to want the paper, but the people you will work under only care about one thing. As noted above, we only care that you can do your job and do it right.
15742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16

dotsforlife wrote:


descloud wrote:


sarteck wrote:


descloud wrote:

As it stands we are terribly lacking in terms of job opportunities all across the United States. Degree or no degree, it seems to hardly make a difference these days.


This is actually quite true in my case. This job I've had for the past four years, when I went in to apply, I was telling the interviewer that yes, I did have a college degree and that I had a certificate in IT proficiency, and he didn't really give a shit. He just cared that I knew how to use Linux and could navigate sufficiently around the command line (things that I wasn't taught in any class).

In other words, he didn't care about my college credits, he only cared about me knowing WTF I was doing.


Basically your experience. This is what makes me not want to go to a four year after my associates. It doesn't seem like we are being taught anything relevant.



I'll say this...

When I bring people in I look for experience over "credentials." Most companies want that piece of paper and certs to back it up, but the ones usually worth working for prefer actual experience. Also, a degree in the IT field is mostly just to get people to look at you, not to hire you. Granted, when I got into the IT field I had a degree and certs to back it, I also had actual knowledge and proven skills that were relateable to the company.

If anything, get your certs over your degree. Those certs provide more pin pointed information most of the time. A degree is helpful of course and if you can you should always get it as well. Connections go a long way these days. I have a kid working under me with nothing more than a high school degree and proven experience. He didn't get his certs until later and we paid for those.

The HR depts and higher up tend to want the paper, but the people you will work under only care about one thing. As noted above, we only care that you can do your job and do it right.



Which is completely reasonable. It's a terrible idea hiring someone who can only recite definitions. Iv learned more about how to take care of my laptop just toying with it than watching online classes or learning definitions. Granted I don't know very much. But the day I fixed my power_driver_state_failure I was very proud of myself. That's the kind of issue people call tech support for. Perhaps the whole "go to college, it's the best way to land a job" needs to be revised when telling the youth how to be successful in life.
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16
9831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Johnstown, PA, USA
Online
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16
I am one of three females among two electrical crews and one mechanical crew, and the other two only showed up because another woman (me) was present. I was even asked if I felt discriminated against or anything (my answer was and is "no"). Construction fields can have high pay, not including per diem. Yeah, women typically take different career paths from men, thus avoiding potentially well-paying paths, like the industrial electrician field.


I'm not keen on the administrative move. It doesn't sound like it's really for the benefit of us "little people."
16841 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 1/29/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


sarteck wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Personally, at first, it may have solved something. Be ware it was 60s when it was initiated, and people I believe were more racist back then, hence my disclaimer, "at that time".


There is no doubt in my mind (although I don't have immediate proof to support it) that you are correct in that people in general were racist to a higher degree during the 60's than they were today.

However, forced diversity is never an acceptable solution.

"Hi, we don't care about who can actually do the job, you need to hire [insert minority] to be diverse."

We live in a meritocracy, in a capitalist society. Unless you can make an argument for hiring minorities being MORE EXPENSIVE than hiring the majority, you cannot argue that "minorities are being kept out of jobs because they are a minority."

If corporations could get away with paying women or black people or any other minority less, don't you think they'd exploit that in a heartbeat? The roles would be completely reversed.


That's not how it works. By hiring them you'd be treating them as equals, not as slaves. Many workers would object to being considered the equal of black folk. It did accomplish its goal of getting people to hire minorities, and I don't see where it went wrong. What, did a race war erupt or something? One could say the desegregation of schools was made in a similar vein (Although some aren't merited, but rather required.)


I've applied to jobs and been passed over BECAUSE I was a male and they needed to meet their quota's for diversity hiring. They told me that they liked my resume and will keep me in mind for the future but they have to satisfy their affirmative action quota.
6663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / USA
Offline
Posted 1/29/16
I am one of like four to six girls compared to 15 to 20 guys in all my major related classes (Pre-Engineering) despite my school being about 60% female. Girls seem much more likely to get a degree in a hobby or in some social field rather than a higher paying STEM field. From what I have seen if there is a wage gap, it is in favor of women in these fields due to the affirmative action programs. And with all the scholarships open only to women in these fields that I have acquired my student loan debt will be virtually nonexistent.
runec 
28346 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/29/16 , edited 1/29/16

sarteck wrote:
So the Obama administration, unable to prove the "gender wage gap," he's now giving power to force employers to reveal employee salaries by gender.


Uh. You know this is all based on reports from the CEA, Census Bureau, Joint Economic Committee, etc right? All of whom as a matter of course publicly provide their reports, sources, etc for your reading pleasure should you actually be inclined to learn something. Obama didn't just randomly declare this on a hunch.



sarteck wrote:]As has been proven time and time again, the disparity in earning between men in general and women in general is not due to some patriarchal conspiracy, but due instead in large part to the difference in jobs that men and women tend to choose..


"Time and time again", eh? Right. This is a very complex issue with a lot of factors involved and while its true that these factors do influence the gap; When you control for said factors there is still a gap. People far smarter than you whose careers are based on this sort of thing have been studying this for years.

But surely you, the random internet poster, have solved this age old dilemma.



sarteck wrote:This initiative by Obama wouldn't be anything to worry about, since that disparity doesn't exist, except that Obama will now be under pressure to "correct" the "wage gap," and so that he can show results, he's obviously going to scream "misogyny" at the first company that shows any disparity in earnings, regardless of the actual reasons.


You mean like Salesforce? One of the largest tech companies in the country who discovered a wage gap when reviewing their own salaries and corrected it voluntary? Without any pressuring or screaming? Whose CEO was skeptical such a gap even existed until he ordered an internal review?



sarteck wrote:
Remember, "Equal opportunity" does not mean "equal outcome." With the rise of socialism in this country, not sure of people can even tell the difference anymore.


Oh noez, not socialism~ You know your country is built on it right? That you, yourself, are inevitably currently depending on it in some way shape or form? Unless you're living off the grid in international waters right now, transcribing your posts entirely by sending carrier pigeons to Panama to be entered by particularly industrious private school children?


3228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/29/16

descloud wrote:

Basically your experience. This is what makes me not want to go to a four year after my associates. It doesn't seem like we are being taught anything relevant.


Honestly, it probably depends on the course, and certainly depends on the instructor. When I was in school, nearly every course was geared towards Microsoft shit when it came to IT. This is all well and good for people that just want to do simple things like tech support, but for those wanting to get into server administration (with the majority of servers running Linux), yeah, it's completely irrelevant.

Certs are okay to try to go for, because they narrow the very broad field quite a bit. Well, specific certs, anyhow.




dotsforlife wrote:

I'll say this...

When I bring people in I look for experience over "credentials." Most companies want that piece of paper and certs to back it up, but the ones usually worth working for prefer actual experience. Also, a degree in the IT field is mostly just to get people to look at you, not to hire you. Granted, when I got into the IT field I had a degree and certs to back it, I also had actual knowledge and proven skills that were relateable to the company.

If anything, get your certs over your degree. Those certs provide more pin pointed information most of the time. A degree is helpful of course and if you can you should always get it as well. Connections go a long way these days. I have a kid working under me with nothing more than a high school degree and proven experience. He didn't get his certs until later and we paid for those.

The HR depts and higher up tend to want the paper, but the people you will work under only care about one thing. As noted above, we only care that you can do your job and do it right.


YES! This exactly. I've never been in a supervisor position, and frankly I don't want to be (I enjoy just doing what I do), but that describes the attitudes of my superiors exactly.

Out of curiosity, what kind of stuff is it that you do in the field?






I guess that's why no one is posting here, right?





Rujikin wrote:

I've applied to jobs and been passed over BECAUSE I was a male and they needed to meet their quota's for diversity hiring. They told me that they liked my resume and will keep me in mind for the future but they have to satisfy their affirmative action quota.


That's happened to me once, but it was because they needed/wanted a black man instead of a woman. (The guy who got the position was actually one of my best friends, and quit some months later to come work where I eventually got my job.)




Ravenstein wrote:

I am one of like four to six girls compared to 15 to 20 guys in all my major related classes (Pre-Engineering) despite my school being about 60% female. Girls seem much more likely to get a degree in a hobby or in some social field rather than a higher paying STEM field. From what I have seen if there is a wage gap, it is in favor of women in these fields due to the affirmative action programs. And with all the scholarships open only to women in these fields that I have acquired my student loan debt will be virtually nonexistent.


You know, if we'd concentrate on preaching the awesomeness of STEM to girls or try to make programs to get girls interested in STEM (which we do already to a degree), I think that would be a MUCH better use of resources. It's clear to most people that it's down to personal choice that there is an earning gap. Instead of blaming the patriarchy and getting nowhere, we could actually try to address the real cause.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.