Obama Signs Equal Pay Act.

[blablover5]

This act is useless because it's impossible to prove if the woman is actually getting paid less.

Maybe as part of a job interview you should go around asking every person what they make. That might work.

And I'd argue that taking more sick days means you get paid less, after all you're given the same amount regardless of gender and so one uses them for a kid and the other saves them up for a vacation. So what?

You can only use so many before you get fired for either gender.

 

[Gertch]

This is a bad idea.

Employers should be free to pay workers what workers are willing to work for.

Yep, just another constriction on business.

When you consider taking a position only a fool would not know the pay they are being offered. If you don't want to work for that pay, don't take the job.

 

[nevermore]

I've read studies in the past (don't have link) that women tend to take more sick days and miss work more frequently than men.

And of course there is maternity leave which normally isn't a male thing.

All of which are covered by other aspects of employment contracts (see "sick days" and "family leave"). They should have no bearing on hourly/yearly salaries.

Also, not all women take sick days or have children. I have taken 3 sick days in the past 4 years, have no children, don't like children, won't have children. I should not be paid less by default because other people with a similar set of chromosomes do.

That said, I do not have a problem with seniority rules that take into account amount of time actually worked. If two people have been at a company for 10 years doing the same job, but one has worked 20 hours a week and the other has worked 40, then the latter employee has produced more during his or her employment time and has therefore earned a bigger raise and more seniority than the former. Sorry to those who have a problem with that, but it's pretty cut-and-dried.

Besides which, if a company has two people wanting a job, one is willing to work for 25 thousand a year and another wants 35 thousand, why can't the company hire the 25 thousand one?

They can, as long as they're not offering the person with two X chromosomes $25,000 instead of $35,000 because she has two X chromosomes. Gender is not a "qualification" to be legally taken into consideration any more than race, religion, height, hair color or shoe size.

 

[Gertch]

They can, as long as they're not offering the person with two X chromosomes $25,000 instead of $35,000 because she has two X chromosomes.

That shouldn't matter at all. She's being offered the job for $25K. Take it or leave it. Same with the "guy." Take it or leave it. But some have to have big brother step in.

 

[trekkerguy]

They can, as long as they're not offering the person with two X chromosomes $25,000 instead of $35,000 because she has two X chromosomes.

That shouldn't matter at all. She's being offered the job for $25K. Take it or leave it. Same with the "guy." Take it or leave it. But some have to have big brother step in.

A male and female capable of the same job should be
offered the same pay regardless of sex. The End.

 

[Squiggy]

This is a bad idea.

Employers should be free to pay workers what workers are willing to work for.

So you mean women deserve to be paid less just because they don't have a penis?

I had no idea you could lift things or type with it.

No. He means that if Obama did it...whatever it was...it's a bad idea.

 

[Hermiod]

A male and female capable of the same job should be
offered the same pay regardless of sex. The End.

Sure, but then men should get equal parental leave too.

 

[trekkerguy]

This is a bad idea.

Employers should be free to pay workers what workers are willing to work for.

So you mean women deserve to be paid less just because they don't have a penis?

I had no idea you could lift things or type with it.

No. He means that if Obama did it...whatever it was...it's a bad idea.

Kinda like good ole two face McCain.

He talks up Broadband Internet needs on the campain but when
Obama wants to do something about it, who needs it?

A male and female capable of the same job should be
offered the same pay regardless of sex. The End.

Sure, but then men should get equal parental leave too.

And I suppose only the big boys can drive a 4X4 too...

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

They can, as long as they're not offering the person with two X chromosomes $25,000 instead of $35,000 because she has two X chromosomes.

That shouldn't matter at all. She's being offered the job for $25K. Take it or leave it. Same with the "guy." Take it or leave it. But some have to have big brother step in.

Yup. Kind of like, if I know a jobless applicant was a Bush supporter and a Republican, and I pay him less than the really cool Obama supporter, doing the same job. Of course I won't tell him that's the reason I'm paying him less. I mean, really its a matter of judgement, amirite?

Anyways, a lot of people are arguing stuff that has nothing to do with the actual bill.

Also keep in mind that a jury has to be convinced that it is discrimination based on that factor and not other stuff (performance, years served, etc etc), and in Ledbetter's case, a Jury came to the conclusion that yes it was gender discrimination.

 

[Hermiod]

A male and female capable of the same job should be
offered the same pay regardless of sex. The End.

Sure, but then men should get equal parental leave too.

And I suppose only the big boys can drive a 4X4 too...

Huh ? This would be a benefit for both sexes.

Men would get to spend more time with their newborn children and it would eliminate the perceived risk that she might get pregnant involved in hiring a woman. A female colleague convinced me of this after she went on maternity leave. Her husband had much more limited paternity leave.

Thanks for trying to misrepresent my views, though.

 

[trekkerguy]

^^^ Well it certianly seemed like a sexist sarcastic remark.

The bit of clarification would have been helpful on the original post.

 

[JoeZhang]

This act is useless because it's impossible to prove if the woman is actually getting paid less.

Maybe as part of a job interview you should go around asking every person what they make. That might work.

There is one european country where everyone's salary is a matter of public record - em.. where was it...?

 

[Hermiod]

^^^ Well it certianly seemed like a sexist sarcastic remark.

The bit of clarification would have been helpful on the original post.

This place is built on sarcastic remarks. There are posters here don't contribute anything else.

Fact is, a lot of managers won't hire a woman or will pay her less because they think she'll get pregnant five minutes later and they'll have to pay her and her temporary replacement. Giving men equal parental leave by law means it's just as much of a "risk" to hire a man knowing his partner might get pregnant and it gives that man more time with his child.

It's win-win.

 

[Gertch]

Yup. Kind of like, if I know a jobless applicant was a Bush supporter and a Republican, and I pay him less than the really cool Obama supporter, doing the same job. Of course I won't tell him that's the reason I'm paying him less. I mean, really its a matter of judgement, amirite?

A company is offering someone a salary in exchange for work performed. Regardless of how fictional a really cool Obama supporter is, it's up to them to decide if the trade is equitable. Same with the misguided Bush supporter.

It's also one of my problems with unions. I don't need some corrupt group taking my money and negotiating my salary for me. I'm an adult and can do that for myself. If I don't like their pay, I walk.

 

[trekkerguy]

^^^ Well it certianly seemed like a sexist sarcastic remark.

The bit of clarification would have been helpful on the original post.

This place is built on sarcastic remarks. There are posters here don't contribute anything else.

Fact is, a lot of managers won't hire a woman or will pay her less because they think she'll get pregnant five minutes later and they'll have to pay her and her temporary replacement. Giving men equal parental leave by law means it's just as much of a "risk" to hire a man knowing his partner might get pregnant and it gives that man more time with his child.

It's win-win.

Agreed. But until that happens, this is much needed.

 

[JoeZhang]

If I don't like their pay, I walk.

Yeah because that's the reality of industrial relations....


No wonder the american worker is whipped, they actually do the work of the managers and owners (like me) for them.

I

 

[Alpha Romeo]

President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act today, Jan. 29, 2009, which reverses a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, in a blow to stop wage discrimination against women and others:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090129/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama

It's the first bill Obama has signed into law as president. This is a clear signal that the Obama administration is intent on reversing the war on workers in the U.S., especially over the past eight years. Hooray for progressive politics!

Red Ranger

The war on workers....please. ALl this will do is make it easier for lazy and incompetent employees to sue their employers.

 

[JoeZhang]

The war on workers....please. ALl this will do is make it easier for lazy and incompetent employees to sue their employers.

How? Where are "lazyness" and "incompetence" covered by this act?

 

[trekkerguy]

The war on workers....please. ALl this will do is make it easier for lazy and incompetent employees to sue their employers.

Right, because women are all incompetent and lazy as workers?

If I don't like their pay, I walk.

Yeah because that's the reality of industrial relations....


No wonder the american worker is whipped, they actually do the work of the managers and owners (like me) for them.

I

My best friend has been the Assistant Manager of his Gamestop store for
two years now without promotion, and pretty much does the job of his
Store Manager who is on salary and leaves early, leaves most managerial
duties to his ASM and regularly takes extra days off cause "He can".

Yet my friend is paid the same hourly wage. The problem is it's impractical
to just walk off a job when you're treated like shit because... well thanks
to a shitter economy you can't just walk across the street for a new job.

 

[Alpha Romeo]

I've read studies in the past (don't have link) that women tend to take more sick days and miss work more frequently than men.

And of course there is maternity leave which normally isn't a male thing.

All of which are covered by other aspects of employment contracts (see "sick days" and "family leave"). They should have no bearing on hourly/yearly salaries.

Also, not all women take sick days or have children. I have taken 3 sick days in the past 4 years, have no children, don't like children, won't have children. I should not be paid less by default because other people with a similar set of chromosomes do.

That said, I do not have a problem with seniority rules that take into account amount of time actually worked. If two people have been at a company for 10 years doing the same job, but one has worked 20 hours a week and the other has worked 40, then the latter employee has produced more during his or her employment time and has therefore earned a bigger raise and more seniority than the former. Sorry to those who have a problem with that, but it's pretty cut-and-dried.

Besides which, if a company has two people wanting a job, one is willing to work for 25 thousand a year and another wants 35 thousand, why can't the company hire the 25 thousand one?

They can, as long as they're not offering the person with two X chromosomes $25,000 instead of $35,000 because she has two X chromosomes. Gender is not a "qualification" to be legally taken into consideration any more than race, religion, height, hair color or shoe size.

What about at will jobs that don't have employment contracts???