Yeah, pretty much

A gender pay gap between men and women who do the same job does not exist, according to a report which also found the “glass ceiling” is the real reason why women receive smaller pay packets than men.

The study, by human resources firm Hay Group, analysed over 8 million workers in 33 different countries and found that women working in the same job function and at the same level within UK firms, on average are paid just 0.8pc less than their male equivalents.

Across Europe the gender pay gap is slightly wider, but still negligible, with men paid 1.6pc more than their female counterparts.

But when comparing remuneration between the genders overall, conversely the study found that men are paid vastly more than women.

And so to the important question. Is this because of discrimination by employers or discrimination by women? If the second, not only what might we do about it but why should we do anything at all?

19 thoughts on “Yeah, pretty much”

  1. You want to talk to my wife about this. She recognises entirely that poor, non-career-focussed, educational choices at University led to our family’s “gender pay gap”.

  2. Bloke in North Dorset

    Wasn’t there a study that showed that women prefer to work closer to homeIn which case they should be looking at income after travel costs and total work time including commute.

    ISTR the same report said when women set up businesses they are more likely to be non-profit and therefore lower paid.

  3. There are a lot of reasons why, in western society, the mass of women earn less than the mass of men and these days it comes down to choices:

    – It is illegal to pay different amounts for the same work.
    – Men work longer hours (on average, yes maybe we are stupid?).
    – Men choose more dangerous jobs
    – Women tend to prioritise other aspects (see the number of women GPs working part-time compared to men). Women GPs earn less than male ones on average, but the reason is obvious.
    – Now there are more women at university, getting better grades than men and going into better jobs. Up to age 30 the wage gap has been inverted in the UK and the USA. You wouldn’t believe it, but you don’t have to drill down very hard to find the data. But it doesn’t fit the narrative.

    Nobody is stopping women going into STEM jobs, they just don’t (with a lot of exceptions). They dominate law studies, the judiciary and medicine and teaching. They are majority in bio sciences (another difficult field).

    Not reaching the top (and some do, so it is not a purely gender thing) is due to choice: family, less hours & more balanced life.

    The desire in the States to combat the apparent inequality is such that now women are being contracted 2-1 in science related jobs.

    More men die on the job, more men die from job-related illnesses and so on and on and on.

    This battle is 50 years out-of-date and meanwhile silence on the state of women in the rest of the world (where there is a real human (and dangerous) battle to be fought)

    But the radical feminists, the SJW and the like keep on trolling.

    Milo is the go to guy for this. He has taken the battle to heart. He is over-the-top but he is fighting for truth and when you see him go head-to-head with a radical feminist you realise that it is like debating a Greenpeace intern. Fact-free zones, lots of feelings and statements. No data and no interest in the reality. There is an agenda that has been bought into and that comes first.

    Actually MIlo doesn’t always ‘win’ because they just say what he says isn’t true (and he tells them where he gets the data) and ignore his arguments.

    Debating with the ‘radical’ chic left is a highly frustrating and unsatisfactory experience. if you don’t believe me there are plenty of example in youtube. I live the same experience with a crowd of friends on a constant basis. Over dinner it can 13 or 14 against one (with a couple of the intellectually more curious ones finally coming over and questionng the topics.

    Back to work. I need to get the billing up. Stop provoking me Tim.

  4. All above comments true. Something I also never see considered is a lag effect of changing attitudes and policies. Anything we do now won’t instantly make CEOs 50:50 M:F. It would take entire careers to filter through. Ignoring all your other (correct) explanations for not seeing 50:50 M:F CEOs, the relevant period to assess is 20/30 years ago when the people who are or could now be CEOs were starting out their careers, not whatever policies or attitudes are in place today.

    Also I second the shout out for Milo. Absolutely fantastic to watch. Throws down fact after fact and all they can respond with is outrage, ad hominems and denial. Followed by claims of harassment and attempts to ban him.

  5. Bilbaoboy

    Absolutely spot on in every word – as SMFS has said, the real concern is that so toxic is the impact of radical feminism that ISIS (or whatever variant) will be welcomed as liberators, rather than oppressors, and at worst be considered the lesser of two evils, by many men in the West…

  6. Nobody is stopping women going into STEM jobs

    In fact, quite the opposite. A desperate and ultimately futile mania to get women into this area.

    not only what might we do about it but why should we do anything at all?

    From the perspective of middle-class white women, everything should be done about it. Imagine – regardless of your choice of training or career, you get paid the same as men. You can do whatever the fuck you want and the money will keep on rolling in.

  7. Mal

    And what really upsets the the rad fems is that Milo is just so deliciously gorgeous!

    We are lucky to have him fighting our battles!

  8. V-P

    Yup. Frightening.

    But all round it is a fact-free world and many people do not want to think anymore.

    In another field we are repeating elections here in Spain and the Podemos people have based their economic programme on raising taxes and achieving (not a word how) 6%, yes 6% growth in the GDP. Just because. And you have rich mates of mine with half-a-dozen properties and earning €200.000/year saying they are going to vote for them.

    Actually they have tried the policy in the autonomous region of Navarra (Pamplona, bulls?) and 2 weeks ago they claimed the tax take was up 20%. Now we know it has suffered no increase, but companies are relocating, unemployment is up and investment down. Radical stupidity!

    Unicorn farts? Yup. The radical Islam is right, we are decadent and have lost the plot. Rad fem fits perfectly in that plot losing.

  9. Someone ought to do a study of the gender pay gap in the NHS. Its the perfect organisation to use as a control. It employs 1.5m people so the sample is massive. There are more women than men in it so it can’t be described as a male dominated industry, its State owned and run so complies 100% with all the gender equality laws, and has high union penetration so any deviation from the law would soon be caught out. It is also pay graded so impossible for a man to earn more than a woman for the same job.

    And then see exactly what the figures show. Which I suspect would be broadly similar to society as a whole. Men working in higher paid higher grades, and tending to work full time. Women more working part time in lower grades. And no-one could argue it was down to ‘patriarchy’ or failure to abide by the equality laws, it would all be down to the choices women made of their careers.

  10. Bilbaoboy

    In one way I was annoyed the US wiped out the ISIS executioner ‘Jihadi John’ – I would have ferried him across to the UK and given him carte Blanche to carry out his activities in higher education institutions across the country – with a particular focus on anyone babbling on about ‘safe spaces’, ‘micro aggressions’, ‘trigger warnings’ and other infantile nonsense which goes unchallenged – lost the plot is right – these people need a dose of reality and it’s a shame the man with the or hang for beheadings couldn’t provide a glimpse into the real world….

    You are spot on – I don’t like to adopt Murphy like tactics on people but on my brother’s Facebook feed I have blocked about half a dozen whose grip of realist is simply too tenuous to trouble myself to argue with… One is sometimes driven to despair…

  11. Any movement and any institution is started for a purpose. That includes the women’s movement (whichever of its various names you use).
    Within a decade, two at most, perpetuation of the movement/institution for its own sake becomes a goal.
    If the original purpose is achieved then perpetuation becomes the only goal.
    At this stage the movement must use deception and obfuscation to perpetuate itself, because the original justification no longer applies.
    That is where I see the women’s movement today (and several others).
    It will wither because women have father’s, brothers and especially sons who they want treated fairly. The mirror image for the real reason behind women’s emancipation.

  12. “That is where I see the women’s movement today (and several others).
    It will wither because women have father’s, brothers and especially sons who they want treated fairly.”

    Is there any evidence that the broad mass of women are in any way opposed to the feminists who control the entire public sphere, from legislative, to State sector, to Third sector, and some parts of the private sector? It seems to me most women (not all of course) are by and large quite happy with the status quo and it will take many more decades of anti-male activity before there is any change of view, if indeed there is any.

    In fact (and its not very PC to say this) I doubt there would ever be a widespread movement among women for changes. Women don’t (as a gender) do the theoretical, they do the personal. If something negatively affects them or their immediate family they will move heaven and earth to oppose it. Things that affect random men across the country, not really bothered.

    So given that only a minority of women will ever personally experience a man in their life being discriminated against, and in a way that is obviously the work of feminism, then the numbers who would be likely to be recruited to work for change are pretty low.

    And the negative effects feminism has on women ( the withdrawal of men from the relationship and marriage market for example) are not obviously the result of feminism, and are usually described as caused by men anyway, so no women is ever going to come to the ‘masculinist’ side because she can’t find a man to marry and have kids with, she’ll just be told to blame men for being ‘afraid of commitment’, ‘acting like children’ etc etc.

    Female emancipation came about because men fought along side them, and crucially fought for it in the corridors of power. I can see not a jot of evidence that any women in power are fighting for men, indeed the complete opposite.

  13. Van_Patten, I have commented on more than one occasion that The Walking Dead isn’t fiction, it is allegory.

  14. @ Pat
    You are unreasonably optimistic – most radfems do’t have sons, a lot of them are radffems because they effectively didn’t have fathers (alimony payments aren’t a parent).

  15. Women do personal- indeed. And when their sons are descrminated against they will act and vote accordingly. Not on a theory but on experience.
    Radical feminists are a minority, and have fewer offspring than the average. They will simply die out.
    I didn’t say that the process would be quick, just that it would happen.

  16. “Is this because of discrimination by employers or discrimination by women? If the second, not only what might we do about it but why should we do anything at all?”

    Its both and why should we do anything at all in either case?

    If women have a cost associated with promoting them above a certain point (whatever the reason – including women’s own work/life balance preferences), then its entirely rational to seek to try to cut their pay by that amount.

    If they don’t then firms are leaving money on the table and a more rational actor will come by and take it (by leaching these women away through paying them more than discriminating competitors will but still less than a man) – until there is no longer a cost advantage to hiring a woman and the pay gap disappears.

    Since there’s still a pay gap for *some* women (straight and in child-rearing age) and not for others and no one is rushing in to take advantage of this potential efficiency increase – and because I do not consider that, taken as a whole, employers are complete morons – I’d have to accept that there’s a cost to promoting women above a certain level.

  17. “And when their sons are discriminated against they will act and vote accordingly. Not on a theory but on experience.”

    But who will tell them its the fault of feminism? There isn’t (nor will there be) any great social movement detailing the problems of boys and young men in society, and blaming feminism for it. Will a woman looking at her son not doing very well in life, doing below average at school, being in a series of low paid jobs, unwilling to attempt to go to uni, not getting a GF or having kids, and say ‘This is the result of feminism?’

    Yes if a woman’s son gets reamed in a particularly nasty divorce, or falls foul of a false rape allegation she might make the connection. But the general low level malaise among young men today will never be laid at the feet of feminism. And if she has daughters as well she’ll have the feminists dripping all the anti-male stuff into her ear on the other side about how women are so hard done by and need special treatment etc etc.

    The number of women who will be able to join the dots up with all that noise around the issue will be very small, indeed IS very small today.

  18. I say let employers, who are spending the actual money, decide who they employ and how much they pay them. It’s nobody else’s business. ‘Over 8 million workers in 33 different countries’ is a statistic. Employers have no stake in statistics.

  19. So Much For Subtlety

    Pat – “It will wither because women have father’s, brothers and especially sons who they want treated fairly.”

    I see no evidence whatsoever that women, taken as a whole, want their fathers, brothers and especially sons to be treated fairly. On the contrary I have seen many women take their former daughters-in-law’s side even when their own flesh and blood is being treated outrageously. I have heard mothers defend the lying cheating women they used to be unable to stand who are taking their sons to the cleaners financially and stealing their children to the hilt on too many occasions.

    In fairness I may know one or two feminists and/or lesbians who had sons and so moderated their insanity a little. But most of the trade is one way.

    We are deeply invested in the myth that mothers care for their children. But they don’t. Not any more, and maybe somewhat less, than fathers. People, basically, only care about themselves. The rest is what we pretend in front of the neighbours because honesty makes you look like a sociopath. Divorce reduces children’s lives by about seven years. Does anyone know a single mother who would not have got divorced if she knew this?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *