I am a firm believer that many people think that adding statistical support to an emotional argument makes it a rational argument. All who deal with statistics know that they can confirm any notion.
Congratulations for having the courage to tackle this and other issues from the reasoned approach. I’m confident you will get many derogatory and emotional responses. Hold the course. I look forward to reading more of your articles. Good Luck.
Ms. Hattiangadi makes some important and perhaps even correct points in her essay regarding equal pay. I have two issues with her logic, however.
First, she complains that the “comparable worth” effort is too complicated and difficult to make a reality. So what? Shall we refuse to improve anything simply because it’s too hard to do? As a nation we already avoid doing the difficult things for expediency’s sake. Level of difficulty should not be the reason we don’t try to achieve something; we’re too happy with mediocrity as it is.
Second, she implies (or at least I infer) that, because equal treatment in the workplace is the law and has been since the passage of the Equal Pay Act and Title VII, it must be the reality as well. If only (to borrow a phrase from today’s youth). The law prohibits sexual harassment–by her logic, therefore, it doesn’t happen. The law prohibits us from refusing to hire a minority simply because he is a minority–I guess, because it’s law, it never happens.
Civil rights laws prohibit us from killing people because of the color of their skin. Then I guess the truck-dragging in Texas never happened. The laws may be on the books, but individuals and corporations break those laws all the time. The mere existence of the laws in no way guarantees that the infractions occur. Ms. Hattiangadi also seems to forget, or at least to not want to admit, that in the not distant past. egregious inequalities occured, even after the laws were enacted.
Pay equity, whatever it means, is worth the effort. If it means that we have to study what’s going on out there and try to figure out if there is a fair way to pay nurses and construction workers, then we have to. The result is worth it. If the studies turn up to support Ms. Hattiangadi’s belief that pay is already equitable, great–but we need more information before we can come to that conclusion.
Ms. Hattiangadi’s essay reads a lot like the folks who say that the people in Malaysia (or pick any Third World country) are better off working for Nike ( or pick any US clothing manufacturer) at scrap wages and for 70 hours a week than they would be without the jobs. Heck, if we paid women more, they might actually decide not to leave the traditionally female jobs!
Sounds like “Heck, sure they are worked brutally hard for 25 cents a day, six days a week, but at least they have a job!” It’s very twisted logic that takes in absolutely no perspective of humanity.
Ms. Hattiangadi seems to believe that the world is an equal playing field. It isn’t. When black men can enter a store without immediately being suspected of being there to create trouble rather than buy something; when women can walk past a construction crew on lunch break without being verbally molested; and when poor school districts can still offer the same education quality and access to higher education–then, perhaps, she can claim an equal playing field. It isn’t yet, and we need to fix that before we throw in the towel because it’s too difficult and, after all, the laws’ mere existence must mean that we don’t have to do anything anyway.
Anita U. Hattiangadi’s article What’s My Line Worth? is the most reasoned and balanced article I have ever read on the subject of the difference between women’s and men’s pay.
In some organizations women are being paid less than men, but this article demolishes the conventional wisdom that all organizations pay women less. I applaud her research and the practical way she has applied the results of her research.
Too often in areas such as this the authors have an agenda (political, cultural, sociological or notoriety) which colors their rhetoric. However this should not lull us to sleep. Individuals should be paid a fair wage not necessarily on some arbitrary “comparable worth” scale.
I will add you to the list of voodoo women that have contributed to the suppression of other women since the beginning of time.
We can find an example of women who undeservedly whine about their lot in life everywhere we go. The next women will be the true statistic that works more than 40 hours, supporting the men that don’t pay her enough provide the American Dream for her family. They don’t whine as much because they don’t have time. Then you will find a self righteous, privileged, backstabber who will deny that we have a problem.
The good old boys have supported the good old boys that needed a break to support their dreams forever. Blacks try do give business to their African American community. Jews support each other every opportunity they get. Greeks support Greeks, Italians take care of each paisano. However, women will find an excuse to not support another women almost every time another women needs support. “Go Girl” is lip service for our fellow gender. Yes, sound the alarm, women are their own worst enemies.
Maybe you are too young to figure it out because you already bought into the story. Women have given up the rage, because it is politically incorrect to protest and they need to protect their own positions. Look where women were at the turn of the 20th century and then what happened when they sent the “Rose Riveters” home to have two baby boomers and gave “the boys” their jobs back. We took a mega step into the back seat and it has taken every minute since then to get a grip again.
Do we need laws against discrimination, and sexual harassment? You bet we do. We still don’t have an Equal Rights Amendment. It was defeated !!
Unemployment under Clinton is the lowest it has been since the war. Statistics look better because employers have to offer competitive wages to fill the jobs. What happens with the next step, job description, title, in the organization is up to the poll taker to measure. Who makes the decision, is it from HR, the CFO, the available gender pool, most qualified, good ol boy, a jealous woman?
Take the proceeds from your book and do some real analysis of how we got here, and why. Give the credit where it is deserved for the freedom of expression, compensation you enjoy and quit living in denial.
Dylan Thomas said “Rage, rage against the dying of the light and do not go gently into that goodnight.” We have a long way to go baby – please don’t surrender our rights to the battles most of us are still trying to win.
I read “What’s My Line Worth?” and was astonished that someone would even think about bucking the myth perpetuated by liberals, feminists and the unions. What’s more irritating is that it was all said by a YOUNG woman!
Someone needs to rein her in! What is this world coming to? How are the instigators of the “victim” culture going to stay in power unless the younger generation is indoctrinated? This article is not helping! I say BRAVO!
I just read the article on the purportedly mythical gender gap and it infuriated me. I found it to be incredibly one-sided, utterly lacking in facts and more of a forum to air the author’s views on comparable worth theory rather than the actual existence of the gender gap.
Ms. Hattiangadi offers no factual bases whatsoever for her opinions. The mere fact that she is an economist at the Employment Policy Foundation fails to lend credibility to her assertions, especially in light of her unabashed conservative viewpoint and thinly veiled agenda for attacking comparable worth theory.
Her analogy of women in the workplace being like 25 year olds and little league coaches versus men as 45 year olds and coaches of major league baseball teams is not only patently offensive but is also a faulty premise upon which she bases many of her opinions. Ms. Hattiangadi’s opinions are clear — if a woman is less experienced in a particular profession or works less hours than a man at the same job she should be paid less.
The issue of the propriety of employers’ failing to acknowledge or consider the overall benefit or societal necessity that a woman take time off or work reduced hours due to childbirth/child rearing when making decisions regarding hiring or pay is the problem that the comparable worth theory seeks to address.
This is an entirely separate issue from whether or not equally qualified women who work the same amount of hours are paid less than men are for doing the same job. This is the issue to which the gender gap speaks and is also the issue which Ms. Hattiangadi’s article fails to address. However, merely because the concept of comparative worth, as a method for addressing the gender gap, is problematic, does not mandate the conclusion that the gender gap itself does not exist.
While some points that the author makes are accurate, I think she missed one of the fundamental reasons why women are not paid as much as men for the same work.
I have been in the workforce for 30 years of full-time employment, 19 of those years have been in Human Resources, and I have observed that the inequities arise not mostly on education, experience or hours of work; but simply on the assumption that if a woman is doing a job it must be worth less.
I will give you a real example. In one company I worked for the positions of mediator between Management and the Workers were held by men, and during this period the jobs were all assigned levels of 10 and 11. Most of these people were not University-educated but had risen through the ranks and assumed the position.
Over a period of time women began to request the opportunity to work in these positions, within a short period of this occurring the FULLY QUALIFIED level for the job became a Level 8. No facet of the work had changed (including the hours of work) yet the job was immediately assigned a lower status, therefore a lower rate of pay.
You can observe this same phenomenon in banks and other parts of the white collar workforce.
It just strikes me as ironic that a woman wrote this book!
While I agree in theory with the author’s statistics, in practice I still see a disparity between men and women’s pay. As an HR manager for a mid-size bank, there is most definitely a “glass ceiling” and a difference in pay even when all issues are considered, such as job worth, seniority, education, number of hours worked and responsibilities.
My first comment would be–it’s a free world and everyone is entitled to their opinions, HOWEVER……
I strongly disagree with Ms. Hattiangadi’s statement that “Unfortunately, the gap amounts to nothing more than voodoo statistics–a carefully constructed “factoid” designed to incite women.”
In my experience, women who work in similar positions as men with similar backgrounds (and often more experience and education) are paid less. To address the issue of “hours worked”–has Ms. Hattiangadi taken into consideration the issue of “hours worked” vs. “productivity”? Right, wrong, or indifferent–career women with children may be in the office fewer hours during the week but are often more productive.
Generally speaking, we forgo two-hour plus “working” lunches in order to get real work done and are often more efficient in meetings and one-on-one issues with co-workers, employees, vendors. etc. So, not sure who Workforce’s demographics are but my guess is that the majority of your readers are career women and you will likely hear from many of them who live this on a daily basis and don’t think much of this author’s “opinion.”
CoverStory
HR ThatReally Works! It’s the most wonderful time of the yearagain! No, not because it’s tax season. It’s timeto honor this year’s 10 most outstanding HR departments! |
General Excellence: SAS Institute
Inc.
By Charles Fishman
SAS Institute isn’t an employer — it’s aprovider. Employees don’t have to worry about balancing work and life becausethey’re one and the same.
Competitive Advantage: Jamba Juice
By Brenda Paik Sunoo
In the come-and-go food industry, Jamba Juice hasfound recruiting and retention strategies that can squeeze out winners from adry labor pool.
| Innovation:Jellyvision By Kelly Dunn Jellyvision was growing so fast it didn’t have time to consider HR –until employees asked for it. Then they used their creative edge todevelop HR that is equally creative. |
Financial Impact: IBM
By Gillian Flynn
HR at IBM suffered drastic cutbacks. But the remaining department developed acall center that saved $180 million dollars for ol’ Big Blue.
Global Outlook: United Nations
By Brenda Paik Sunoo
A diverse group of professionals bring staff development issues to the top ofthe United Nations’ list of concerns.
| Partnership:Connecticut State Department of Education By Nancy Wong Connecticut’s Department of Education fought to improve the schoolenvironment and bring cooperation to the labor-management relationship. |
Managing Change: Bayer Consumer Care Division
By Jennifer Laabs
The HR team at Bayer’s Myerstown, Pennsylvania,production facility initiated a process that helped the plant become moreprofitable.
Service: QUALCOMM
By Samuel Greengard
QUALCOMM offers a range of online training coursesand college degree programs to employees in five states and Israel.
| Qualityof Life: Patagonia By Jennifer Laabs By providing a culture that supports employees’ passions, Patagoniareaps success and, in turn, supports “green” causes worldwide. |
Vision: GTE
By Charlene Marmer Solomon
The challenge to GTE HR managers was tantalizing:find a credible way to measure HR’s contribution to the business.
HR101
Training
In this month’sissue, HR 101 shows you the problem with skills gapping, and why high-techtraining tools may never be “top of the line.”
Departments
News Angle
— HR Goes Flat at Coca-Cola
— Labor Department PutsStock in Overtime
The Buzz
— Working Wounded: How To Sponsor Employees
— On the Contrary: OnWriting and HR
InfoWise
Caught in the Web of Customer Service
Forté
Training Conference Launches a NASA Move
Legal Insight
Another Look at the Employee Handbook
Your HR Career
Negotiating Pay Raises; To Stay or Go
Crossfire
Can Immigration Solve the Labor Shortage?
