Australia's gender pay gap

[danieldemol]

I was reading a useful article on the gender pay gap in Australia which points out;

'The latest gender pay gap report has revealed a woman is paid, on average, $18,000 less than a man over a year.'

Source: Workers reluctant to return to the office may intensify gender pay gap, lawyers warn

It pointed out injustice in base pay rates which I strongly support being addressed, however where things appear to me to get a little more tricky is with the issue of equalising the pay of for example working mothers who can't do much overtime with men who are doing lots of overtime.

On the one hand if we were doing away with wages completely and replacing them with a universal basic income I could see the point of all pays being equalised, however if one intends to keep the wage system in place it seems to me strange to do it lopsided.

The reason being is because it seems to me that the whole point of wages is to encourage workers to work longer hours. So if you have a woman working base hours getting paid as much as a man working lots of overtime where is the encouragement for career women for example to work just as many hours as their male counterparts?

Your thoughts?

 

[McBell]

I was reading a useful article on the gender pay gap in Australia which points out;

'The latest gender pay gap report has revealed a woman is paid, on average, $18,000 less than a man over a year.'

Source: Workers reluctant to return to the office may intensify gender pay gap, lawyers warn

It pointed out injustice in base pay rates which I strongly support being addressed, however where things appear to me to get a little more tricky is with the issue of equalising the pay of for example working mothers who can't do much overtime with men who are doing lots of overtime.

On the one hand if we were doing away with wages completely and replacing them with a universal basic income I could see the point of all pays being equalised, however if one intends to keep the wage system in place it seems to me strange to do it lopsided.

The reason being is because it seems to me that the whole point of wages is to encourage workers to work longer hours. So if you have a woman working base hours getting paid as much as a man working lots of overtime where is the encouragement for career women for example to work just as many hours as their male counterparts?

Your thoughts?

Put them all on hourly.
Then the actual amounts are based upon how much they actually work.
If a person works 60 hours a week, of course they are going to bring home more money than someone who works 25 0r 30 hours a week.
So their hourly pay rate is the same.
their checks will be vastly different.

 

[danieldemol]

Put them all on hourly.
Then the actual amounts are based upon how much they actually work.
If a person works 60 hours a week, of course they are going to bring home more money than someone who works 25 0r 30 hours a week.
So their hourly pay rate is the same.
their checks will be vastly different.

If I read the article correctly it would seem that the hourly base rate is not equal yet so there is room for improvement there, but even though I appreciate the concern for single working mothers for example im not sure it made sense to me to increase the pay of those who work less hours either, at least not in that way. For me I would be more inclined to take a tax off higher income earners to make a government payment for lower income earners.

That way there would still be an incentive to work more hours for those who could as I see it.

 

[Kfox]

I was reading a useful article on the gender pay gap in Australia which points out;

'The latest gender pay gap report has revealed a woman is paid, on average, $18,000 less than a man over a year.'

Does this take into account different abilities within the same job? Ex; Job X you might get paid extra if you can operate a crane, certified welder, etc. Does it take into account who is more likely to take time off when having children, or who is more likely to work night shift which usually pays more? Seems to me if companies could get away with paying women less for the same work, they would get rid of all the men and hire women instead. The fact they are not doing this tells me there is something else involved.

 

[danieldemol]

Does this take into account different abilities within the same job? Ex; Job X you might get paid extra if you can operate a crane, certified welder, etc.

'The figures in this article are based on "base pay". If you use a "total remuneration" figure that takes in penalties and bonuses, some gaps change. Jetstar's gap decreases to 43.7 per cent. Commonwealth Bank's increases to 29.9 per cent.'
Source: Gender pay shock as big gaps revealed in what men and women earn at nation's biggest companies

Does it take into account who is more likely to take time off when having children, or who is more likely to work night shift which usually pays more? Seems to me if companies could get away with paying women less for the same work, they would get rid of all the men and hire women instead.

I believe your assumption is incorrect.

The fact they are not doing this tells me there is something else involved.

There is and its called misogyny unless you know of a better contender which fits the data in my view.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I've always wondered why, if the clerk doing checkout at the grocery store is a man, he gets paid more than the girl at the next cash over. What is he doing, exactly, that is of more value than what she is? Or the nurse, changing the dressing on a patient after surgery -- why does the female nurse deserve to be paid less than the male?

Nobody has ever been able to explain that to me in any way that makes sense to me. When I was the VP of IT for a major financial institution, my pay scales were the same for Business Analysts whether they were male or female, and for Programmers -- whether they were nerds or nerdesses! So long, of course, as their analytical and coding abilities were basically equal.

 

[Shaul]

Using an aggregate based on one employment factor such as gender while ignoring a plethora of other plausible causation factors doesn't prove anything.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Using an aggregate based on one employment factor such as gender while ignoring a plethora of other plausible causation factors doesn't prove anything.

Agreed. I've only looked briefly at the gender pay scales just released here in Australia, but I'm yet to understand what they are supposed to prove.

On average, women are paid less than men. Okay, so...?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I've always wondered why, if the clerk doing checkout at the grocery store is a man, he gets paid more than the girl at the next cash over. What is he doing, exactly, that is of more value than what she is? Or the nurse, changing the dressing on a patient after surgery -- why does the female nurse deserve to be paid less than the male?

Nobody has ever been able to explain that to me in any way that makes sense to me. When I was the VP of IT for a major financial institution, my pay scales were the same for Business Analysts whether they were male or female, and for Programmers -- whether they were nerds or nerdesses! So long, of course, as their analytical and coding abilities were basically equal.

Is that happening though?

To be clear, I'm sure it is, and should be called out, but is nurse A getting paid more to do the same job as nurse B due to gender? Really?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I was reading a useful article on the gender pay gap in Australia which points out;

'The latest gender pay gap report has revealed a woman is paid, on average, $18,000 less than a man over a year.'

Source: Workers reluctant to return to the office may intensify gender pay gap, lawyers warn

It pointed out injustice in base pay rates which I strongly support being addressed, however where things appear to me to get a little more tricky is with the issue of equalising the pay of for example working mothers who can't do much overtime with men who are doing lots of overtime.

On the one hand if we were doing away with wages completely and replacing them with a universal basic income I could see the point of all pays being equalised, however if one intends to keep the wage system in place it seems to me strange to do it lopsided.

The reason being is because it seems to me that the whole point of wages is to encourage workers to work longer hours. So if you have a woman working base hours getting paid as much as a man working lots of overtime where is the encouragement for career women for example to work just as many hours as their male counterparts?

Your thoughts?

I don't see where this points out clear injustices.
I do believe there are injustices, but don't think this does much other than establish a mechanism for ham-fisted peer pressure.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Using an aggregate based on one employment factor such as gender while ignoring a plethora of other plausible causation factors doesn't prove anything.

I believe the causes of the gap need to be more specifically explored, and I won't jump to the conclusion that there's widespread sexism in Australia's firms without sufficient evidence supporting that view. However, what causation factors could be so closely correlated with gender without also pointing to discrimination or including discrimination themselves, to one extent or another? That is, what would so many women be doing differently than men that would result in such a pay gap (bearing in mind the differences between various fields of work, their different requirements, etc.), and would it be realistic to assume that so many women across the country were doing it in the first place?

I think follow-up exploration of the pay gap could help to clarify the findings, which don't seem to contain sufficient insight for nationwide or statewide changes at this time due to the lack of further details. For example, I believe the reasons or possible reasons for the considerably lower percentage of women in high-paying jobs in some companies could be reported on further:

As Qantas notes in a statement, the figures show what's happening across the whole organisation:

From Qantas Group chief people officer Catherine Walsh:

"This does not mean women are paid less than men to do the same jobs at Qantas and Jetstar, but shows there is a significant under-representation of women in highly paid roles like pilots and engineers across airlines globally."​

It is not about "equal pay for equal work".

Gender pay shock as big gaps revealed in what men and women earn at nation's biggest companies

The gender pay gap — the difference between what men and women are paid in the same organisation — is a stubborn problem. Now, explosive new data from a government agency lets 5 million workers know the gap at their employer.

www.abc.net.au

 

[danieldemol]

Using an aggregate based on one employment factor such as gender while ignoring a plethora of other plausible causation factors doesn't prove anything.

Instead of being vague why not address which plausible causation factors were ignored?

 

[danieldemol]

I believe the causes of the gap need to be more specifically explored, and I won't jump to the conclusion that there's widespread sexism in Australia's firms without sufficient evidence supporting that view. However, what causation factors could be so closely correlated with gender without also pointing to discrimination or including discrimination themselves, to one extent or another? That is, what would so many women be doing differently than men that would result in such a pay gap (bearing in mind the differences between various fields of work, their different requirements, etc.), and would it be realistic to assume that so many women across the country were doing it in the first place?

I think follow-up exploration of the pay gap could help to clarify the findings, which don't seem to contain sufficient insight for nationwide or statewide changes at this time due to the lack of further details. For example, I believe the reasons or possible reasons for the considerably lower percentage of women in high-paying jobs in some companies could be reported on further:

Gender pay shock as big gaps revealed in what men and women earn at nation's biggest companies

The gender pay gap — the difference between what men and women are paid in the same organisation — is a stubborn problem. Now, explosive new data from a government agency lets 5 million workers know the gap at their employer.

www.abc.net.au

It may still be due to misogyny though, for example can you think of a reason why women who have to spend just as much time away from home as a pilot to be an air hostess couldn't actually be a pilot? I'm not saying there isn't one but I think the public deserves to know.

 

[danieldemol]

I don't see where this points out clear injustices.

See my response to @debaterslayer regarding a possible reason women aren't employed in equal numbers as pilots in post #13

I do believe there are injustices, but don't think this does much other than establish a mechanism for ham-fisted peer pressure.

It encourages competition between companies in my view. If company A manages to value its women more comparably to men than company B guess who the brightest women are going to line up to work for?

 

[Secret Chief]

I've always wondered why, if the clerk doing checkout at the grocery store is a man, he gets paid more than the girl at the next cash over. What is he doing, exactly, that is of more value than what she is? Or the nurse, changing the dressing on a patient after surgery -- why does the female nurse deserve to be paid less than the male?

Huh? Different rate of pay? Illegal in the UK.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It may still be due to misogyny though, for example can you think of a reason why women who have to spend just as much time away from home as a pilot to be an air hostess couldn't actually be a pilot? I'm not saying there isn't one but I think the public deserves to know.

I think it's possible that it's due to sexism, but the report in the OP doesn't seem to me to establish this by itself, hence my view that more investigation is needed. I agree that the public deserves to know what the details are.

 

[Shaul]

Instead of being vague why not address which plausible causation factors were ignored?

Comparable jobs, numbers of hours worked, etcetera. I don't have the onus to prove the negative. Those that posit that gender is the causal factor have the onus.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Should be an equal pay rate for equal work.
However hours is a very poor basis for measuring pay.
Two people doing exactly the same job may have very different outputs and or quality of product.
In any given instance sex may or may not be a factor. But in essence they should be treated equally. But the higher pay given to the indevidual creating more value.

 

[danieldemol]

Comparable jobs, numbers of hours worked, etcetera. I don't have the onus to prove the negative. Those that posit that gender is the causal factor have the onus.

The article seems to have considered that hours worked may be a factor in some cases.

Comparable jobs is a non-issue if women aren't being supported to apply for those roles eg pilots vs air hostess in my view

I didn't ask you to prove the negative, just checking whether you had any factors not mentioned by the article.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It may still be due to misogyny though, for example can you think of a reason why women who have to spend just as much time away from home as a pilot to be an air hostess couldn't actually be a pilot? I'm not saying there isn't one but I think the public deserves to know.

Are you suggesting that there are large numbers of women applying for jobs as pilots? That there is discriminatory hiring practices? That stewards and stewardesses lack ambition?
I honestly have no clue what you think it is the public deserves to know.