Keeps coming up and we have a new rule in the UK to try to help tackle it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39502872

Good rule. I'm pissed I never thought of that.

Amusingly, it's the sort of idea I went on about in the <gasp> AC thread. It's not about AC itself but that information and the role of social pressure is much undervalued.

We definitely don't utilize shame enough in public policy.

i can already see a dozen posts ahead where the moderation rules interfere with adults have an honest conversation about the topic which has already happened in the other thread where posts were deleted. theres interesting info and discussion to be had, unfortunately neither 2p2 politics forums will let you honestly discuss these issues. its as if radical social construction theories have taken the place of sanity and science that tell you men and women are actually different when measuring as a group. unfortunate

California has estimated their pay gap to be about $80 billion annually, I think. Was from a study last week or so.

I think this has been on the cards for a while, if my employer's (a Government financial institution) recent senior recruitments are anything to go by.

Naming and shaming sounds great on the surface, but will lead to distortions in recruitment.

Lol at posting in this thread. Any arguments about generalities that may apply to women will get moved or deleted.

Worthless topic, thread, forum.

1) If there were reasonably large pay gaps between men and women after accounting for factors such as field of education, experience, working hours, negotiation skills, and so on, wouldn't there be at least some companies hiring women en masse as they are cheaper while supposedly getting the same quality?

2) If you approve of this, do you approve of similar regulations concerning the pay of, say, short men? Wiki:

I've long since given up trying to talk sense to people that can't understand basic economic concepts.

But I'm curious apple pie how you reconcile both 1 and 2. Are there companies that are hiring short people en masse?

Some info on how they calculate the "pay gap": http://visual.ons.gov.uk/the-gender-...at-affects-it/

Seems like to get an accurate number you would have to control for this stuff.

i'm sure no one has ever thought about controlling for stuff in scientific studies before

I'm sure they thought about it but never seem to do it when talking about pay gaps, guess it would ruin the narrative.

Feel free to provide a list of all the gender pay gap studies that don't control for stuff

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-...radio-podcast/

Bounced on my girl's wage gap to this thread for about 15 minutes before I realized how sad and pathetic her salary is compared to mine, and I work at McDonalds.

Pot, kettle.

Can you expand on this? It's interesting because part of the solution in my view has to be distortions in the recruitment market. A benefit of doing it this way is that directly legislating the distortions is both very hard to do and then hard to undo. Any distortion in recruitment will dissolve as the gender wage gap gets resolved - this almost certainly includes more women in the most senior positions.

I quoted it above.

Having worked through the '90s under a regime where positive discrimination was unofficially enforced and watched the organisation slowly and predictably fall apart as lower-ability people were continually over-promoted, I feel that the primary function of recruitment should be to employ the 'strongest' candidate where there is one (according to the selection process), and only to use demographics as tie-breakers.

That the gender pay gap still exists in this day and age (9-10% for full time workers in the cited link), almost 50 years after the Equal Pay Act, is an indication to me of two things: that in some workplaces women probably still (illegally) earn less than men for doing the same work; and that for various reasons a smaller proportion of women still work in the higher paid jobs (eg technical, scientific, legal, financial etc) than men, and a higher proportion of women still work in low to medium paid jobs (eg catering, retail, HR etc) than men. It also seems likely to me that there are some types of work that appeal to fewer women than men and other types that appeal more to women.

I see declaring gender pay gaps as a positive step if the reasons for the gap are understood and artificial means of eliminating the gap are not adopted in an attempt to compensate for systemic faults in education and upbringing - two wrongs not making a right - but then I also see all salaries being declared as a desirable step towards greater transparency and fairness in the workplace.

Lol.

#1, it's illegal to pay women less.

#2, if you force companies to pay people equally you lose the incentive for the higher paid people to work hard, hurting the company.

Total idiocy. Everyone has lost their minds. Jalfrezi should be a CNN analyst with his second year college assessment.

#1. Illegal but very hard to identify and correct, ldo you useless cretinous mook.

#2. Total reading comprehension failure, ldo you useless cretinous mook.

It is ILLEGAL to pay women less. Repeat that a few times.

You do not know what you are talking about, at all. At all. You just spew nonsense and liberal talking points. It's downright comical.

Let's just do an extreme thought experiment.

Let's say there are two groups of people A and B. A's really like sky diving. B's really like scuba diving.

Now for whatever reason, As have historically had a high percentage of well paying jobs. And so all of these industries place a premium on knowing about and liking sky diving. Company retreats. Casual office talk. Informal activities. Management 'meetings'. Etc.

Now, we're probably going to find that Bs avoid these industries. Not because of the actual work but because the environment isn't very friendly for them and it's harder to advance because they don't fit in as well at the traditional, totally work-unrelated, activities.

It would seem pretty silly to me to say that these high paying industries don't appeal to Bs. It's the artificial environment around the industry and not the work itself that doesn't appeal to them.

Why don't you take the logical approach and look at countries where there is a lot of choice in what fields women and men enter and compare it to counties and don't, then report back with your findings?

Lol. You people. Wow.