Does it exist?

 

19 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

Would it be considered a pay gap if a female employee after doing her HR job for years.....was told one day that the company was creating another job which would be above her,  the male getting this job was going to transfer to the HR department and  would become her boss,  but she had to train the male for this position because he doesn't know anything about the HR department.  And yes the male was making more money than the female through all of this process. 

This actually happened to somebody very close to me.  Is it a form of the perceived pay gap ?  

 

I've seen that exact same thing happen a few times over my career.   With both genders.      I wouldn't consider this to be the norm though?  

2 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

I agree that your example has nothing to do with the gender pay gap, if it exists at all. 

I think you misread my post. 

26 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

Would it be considered a pay gap if a female employee after doing her HR job for years.....was told one day that the company was creating another job which would be above her,  the male getting this job was going to transfer to the HR department and  would become her boss,  but she had to train the male for this position because he doesn't know anything about the HR department.  And yes the male was making more money than the female through all of this process. 

This actually happened to somebody very close to me.  Is it a form of the perceived pay gap ?  

 

That would be a prime example of gender pay gap and the way they skirted the system.

39 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

That would be a prime example of gender pay gap and the way they skirted the system.

No it isn't.   I've seen it before in the Gov't where person A is *acting* in the role but can't fill the role because they are missing a specific education or job experience.   Person B comes in and gets the job even if they are far less productive and knowledgeable and Person A is required to train Person B despite acting in that role for a year.    

For your example one person is being hired as a boss/manager.  Usually managers pull a higher salary then their employees.   Maybe that "man" was better qualified we don't know?  What if they hired a female instead?  It still wouldn't be fair but what would you call that?   

I'd like to see real examples where two people share the exact same job duties,  have the exact same education,  have the same job experience where the male makes more money then the female?  

1 hour ago, Brandon said:

No it isn't.   I've seen it before in the Gov't where person A is *acting* in the role but can't fill the role because they are missing a specific education or job experience.   Person B comes in and gets the job even if they are far less productive and knowledgeable and Person A is required to train Person B despite acting in that role for a year.    

For your example one person is being hired as a boss/manager.  Usually managers pull a higher salary then their employees.   Maybe that "man" was better qualified we don't know?  What if they hired a female instead?  It still wouldn't be fair but what would you call that?   

I'd like to see real examples where two people share the exact same job duties,  have the exact same education,  have the same job experience where the male makes more money then the female?  

Just for the record person "A" was not just acting in a role.....they were doing the work and making the decisions as they needed to be made.  Person "B" had zero knowledge about the work required, and had no qualifications within the job field.  But yes person "B" was a feeble manager who was moved sideways.  

Within this company as well they have promoted females to a "safety supervisor" role,  and one of the females did bring up the pay equity issue as she was being paid less than her male counterparts doing the same job.  I know this as fact as I was able to follow this story first hand ...... but she ended up leaving the company and the issue was dropped after that. 

1 hour ago, Brandon said:

I'd like to see real examples where two people share the exact same job duties,  have the exact same education,  have the same job experience where the male makes more money then the female?  

 

22 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

Just for the record person "A" was not just acting in a role.....they were doing the work and making the decisions as they needed to be made.  Person "B" had zero knowledge about the work required, and had no qualifications within the job field.  But yes person "B" was a feeble manager who was moved sideways.  

Within this company as well they have promoted females to a "safety supervisor" role,  and one of the females did bring up the pay equity issue as she was being paid less than her male counterparts doing the same job.  I know this as fact as I was able to follow this story first hand ...... but she ended up leaving the company and the issue was dropped after that. 

 this work for you?

Do we know all the facts ,  did the others have higher pay because they had more experience and/or qualifications?  

A one off example isn't exactly showing that gender pay gap exists.   I seen the same scenario with the roles reverse where a female has been given a job because either she slept her way to the top or was married/dating someone with a  higher position ...  I don't consider that gender pay gap .... 

Now show me something where a big company like Wal-Mart or Costco pays a female cashier 15 dollars an hour and a male cashier 18 dollars an hour and then I will believe in this pay gap.  

Telling me that you know a buddy who was screwed over for a position because a male got the job is not even close to showing that gender pay gap exists. 

I can safely assume that nearly everyone in life has seen someone more qualified being passed over for a promotion because the head boss was buddies with whoever they gave the position to.   That's not gender pay gap... that's just a typical crappy part of life. 

So, what's the verdict?

37 minutes ago, Brandon said:

Do we know all the facts ,  did the others have higher pay because they had more experience and/or qualifications?  

A one off example isn't exactly showing that gender pay gap exists.   I seen the same scenario with the roles reverse where a female has been given a job because either she slept her way to the top or was married/dating someone with a  higher position ...  I don't consider that gender pay gap .... 

Now show me something where a big company like Wal-Mart or Costco pays a female cashier 15 dollars an hour and a male cashier 18 dollars an hour and then I will believe in this pay gap.  

Telling me that you know a buddy who was screwed over for a position because a male got the job is not even close to showing that gender pay gap exists. 

 I can safely assume that nearly everyone in life has seen someone more qualified being passed over for a promotion because the head boss was buddies with whoever they gave the position to.   That's not gender pay gap... that's just a typical crappy part of life. 

If you are going to argue over semantics, then you need to clearly define what Gender pay gap is. From "show me something where a big company like Wal-Mart or Costco pays a female cashier 15 dollars an hour and a male cashier 18 dollars an hour" - you will find it difficult to show GPG, because it is more complicated than that.

Using one off examples isn't showing that their is an issue.   

The closest I've ever seen of any favoritism in hiring practices is with the federal gov't clearly stating that visible minorities and indigenous people will be given preference for the jobs.   Now that IMO is a clear indication of choosing someone over someone else for the wrong reasons.

I'm still waiting for real examples of places having hiring practices where they pay one gender more then another.   The example given was a male doing a lateral to a different area of his work and that is super common practice everywhere.   

Nobody can give real examples so clearly it doesn't exist.  

 

Edited February 6, 20196 yr by Brandon

Leave it to people who confuse weather with climate to also confuse the gender pay gap with equal pay.

It must be so easy to be incurious (I know they won't even bother looking it up).

 

ex·ist

verb

 

1.

have objective reality or being.

"there existed no organization to cope with espionage"

 

When you say something does not exist, it means it has no reality, no being.  

 

To say the 'gender pay gap' does not exist means it is not there at all.  When someone does cite an example or two, it makes no sense to say 'it does not exist.'

 

Or are some of you just being deliberately obtuse?

 

 

9 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

What is another way?

When I get paid more for banging my head against a wall than a woman does.  

13 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

That would be a prime example of gender pay gap and the way they skirted the system.

So then if the opposite happened and a woman was given the higher role after being trained by a man, then you would agree that there is a gender pay gap that discriminates against men? Really?

6 hours ago, Mark H. said:

When I get paid more for banging my head against a wall than a woman does.  

Don't know what this means Mark, but I know the feeling when dealing with people trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

13 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I think you misread my post. 

I think you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, purely to try and defend an imaginary issue created by politicians to generate a victimhood mentality. 

7 hours ago, Wideleft said:

Leave it to people who confuse weather with climate to also confuse the gender pay gap with equal pay.

It must be so easy to be incurious (I know they won't even bother looking it up).

 

But it appears to be easy to be willfully blind when you never question or think about what you've been told is "truth". Questioning internal confirmation biases is a good thing. Try it some time.

6 hours ago, Mark H. said:

ex·ist

 

verb

 

1.

have objective reality or being.

"there existed no organization to cope with espionage"

 

When you say something does not exist, it means it has no reality, no being.  

 

 

To say the 'gender pay gap' does not exist means it is not there at all.  When someone does cite an example or two, it makes no sense to say 'it does not exist.'

 

Or are some of you just being deliberately obtuse?

 

 

There is definitely a lot if deliberate obtuseness going on here for sure. Like saying someone has cited "an example or two".  Where? When??? 

My buddy tried to apply for the RCMP. He was told to get lost. Meanwhile women were being told to apply and were encouraged to apply.  Is this an example of a gender pay gap against men, or is it just blatant discrimination?

10 hours ago, Mark H. said:

ex·ist

 

verb

 

1.

have objective reality or being.

"there existed no organization to cope with espionage"

 

When you say something does not exist, it means it has no reality, no being.  

 

To say the 'gender pay gap' does not exist means it is not there at all.  When someone does cite an example or two, it makes no sense to say 'it does not exist.'

 

Or are some of you just being deliberately obtuse?

 

 

Lol this is an extreme reach to justify the argument.  

One (albeit very poor) example does not mean that this is a real issue.    

When folks like Mark become pedantic then it's clear that they have zero argument and are either blind-fully following what they read or are just trying to troll.  

I'll gladly read any job postings Mark that you can find on larger companies that have in that posting  where it shows that they pay a higher wage based on gender.   

 

While it's clear there are those who have blindly chosen to believe that a gender pay gap exists without any real proof, the example provided does highlight a dangerous consequence of an imaginary problem and unworkable principles being applied to "solve" said problem. Real gender and sex discrimination being exercised to combat fake gender and sex discrimination.  And that helps no one.

It's clear to me that there are certain people who will always trust something is real, as long as the information comes from a source that they trust, and aligns with their confirmation biases. This is true no matter what side they are on, right or left. And these people can be counted on to defend the indefensible and imaginary, no matter what. And tell everyone else that they are the ones with the closed minds. And if that fails, start talking about man-made climate change.

3 hours ago, Brandon said:

  

I'll gladly read any job postings Mark that you can find on larger companies that have in that posting  where it shows that they pay a higher wage based on gender.   

 

You would probably have to translate the job posting as it would be posted in Iran or Saudi Arabia. 

Edited February 7, 20196 yr by kelownabomberfan

18 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

There is definitely a lot if deliberate obtuseness going on here for sure. Like saying someone has cited "an example or two".  Where? When??? 

My buddy tried to apply for the RCMP. He was told to get lost. Meanwhile women were being told to apply and were encouraged to apply.  Is this an example of a gender pay gap against men, or is it just blatant discrimination?

I'm beyond incredulous on this topic. Of course that is an example of gender pay gap.  

But when I cite an example from the teaching profession, of administrators more often being male, you just dismiss it.

Here, you have cited the exact same thing: not a difference in pay, but a difference in opportunity, which leads to a pay gap.

14 hours ago, Brandon said:

Lol this is an extreme reach to justify the argument.  

One (albeit very poor) example does not mean that this is a real issue.    

When folks like Mark become pedantic then it's clear that they have zero argument and are either blind-fully following what they read or are just trying to troll.  

I'll gladly read any job postings Mark that you can find on larger companies that have in that posting  where it shows that they pay a higher wage based on gender.   

 

I know - right?  Clearly it's the postings that are important - not who actually gets hired

13 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

You would probably have to translate the job posting as it would be posted in Iran or Saudi Arabia. 

It's only been a few years since Saudi Arabian women could legally be in the workforce.

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

I know - right?  Clearly it's the postings that are important - not who actually gets hired

Well government hires purely based on a structured interview with points.

You are suggesting in private they will hire males and ignore a more qualified female who would bring more profits to the company?

Maybe my experiences in private enterprise are weird because from my experiences it's cut throat and whoever makes them the most money and/or who works for the cheapest survives.

I think you are stuck in the 50's because in modern times it's all about the money.