Gender Pay gap Govt paying women up to 39% less than they pay men!

Forums › Off topic › Gender Pay gap Govt paying women up to 39% less than they pay men!

MaxLV

645 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 154

Topic # 191088 23-Jan-2016 00:12

One person supports this post

Heard on the radio/read in the news papers, etc....

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/76151018/State-Services-Commission-reveals-gender-pay-gap-in-public-sector

As a tax payer I'm shocked and dismayed at this situation!

Why hasn't the Government sacked all the males working for them, and hired only females? They'd save up to 39% on their wages bill that we, taxpayer shell out for!

Back to the real world. If the government were really paying women up to 39% less than men, they'd have up in court years ago, for breaking the equal pay act (or whatever it's called)

Did some research.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/Income/gender-pay-gap.aspx[/url]

Statistics NZ give a rundown on how they calculate the 'pay gap'. It seems to me that they discount every factor that will lessen or even remove the 'pay gap' and only use any factor that will prove their 'point' (like global warming 'science')

For example:

We present the gender pay gap as a percentage, which we calculate as:

equation for calculating the gender pay gap.

That is: we subtract female pay from male pay, divide the result by male pay, then multiply by 100.

If males and females received exactly the same pay, the gap would be zero. If males received twice as much pay as females, the gender pay gap would be 50 percent.

At Statistics NZ we have three main ways to measure pay: hourly pay, weekly pay, and annual pay. Each measure would give a different picture of the gender pay gap.

Hourly pay is preferred because it measures pay for a fixed amount of work (one hour). It is not directly affected by the number of hours a person works, or periods without pay.
Weekly pay is affected by the amount of pay received per hour, and the number of hours worked per week. If a person works part time, they have less pay than if they work full time. Weekly pay is less suitable for measuring pay equity because it reflects differences which are due to hours worked.
Annual pay is even less suitable for measuring pay equity because (along with hours worked) it is also affected by periods out of work, and by unpaid leave. If a person stops working during the year, they receive less annual pay than if they had worked continuously.

If we want to understand the fairness of pay (do males and females get equal pay for equal work?) the hourly pay measure is the best. It allows us to compare male and female pay for a fixed amount of work (one hour).

In an ideal world, we would also match males and females on characteristics that influence pay, and see if there is any remaining difference. For example, we expect occupation and qualifications to affect pay. So we would compare the difference in pay for males and females within the same occupations, and holding the same qualifications.

However, we don't do this analysis because it isn't possible to control for all factors that influence pay (and we don't measure all factors). We are also limited by our surveys' sample size.

And for for some sanity:

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11575013

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

9608 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1409

Reply # 1477161 23-Jan-2016 01:13

It is a useful statistic because it does give some indication of the overall gap. But it is only one stat. There are more available.

As you would expect (or maybe you wouldn't) the ministry for women has a much more sensible analysis than either stuff or nzherald:

http://women.govt.nz/our-work/utilising-womens-skills/income/gender-pay-gap

I think that is what you are looking for instead of hype.

Btw, could not make your stats dept link work.

mattwnz

13803 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1718

Reply # 1477162 23-Jan-2016 01:26

Those sorts of stats don't tell the full story. They may have more men working in the higher ranked / higher paid jobs, and more woman in the lower ranked positions. If that is the case, then it is easy to see why 'on average' womans wages are less. But that doesn't mean woman are paid less at all when you compare position with position. It is really the media looking at any angle they can to come up with such a heading. Stats can be easily read to suit.

Try Wrike: fast, easy, and efficient project collaboration software

Geektastic

11064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3482

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1477189 23-Jan-2016 09:01

2 people support this post

There's no genuine gap.

If you measure a man and a woman with the same years of experience, same qualifications and same talent. Also ignore things like nipping off to have kids, causing inconvenience and cost to businesses and thus making yourself less attractive as an employee.

What the ranters want would eventually result in higher pay for women just for being women.

My wife earned well into six figures for the last 3 years, so know it's perfectly possible for women to earn far more than many men.

kiwifidget

1399 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 312

Subscriber

Reply # 1477200 23-Jan-2016 10:24

3 people support this post

My self-employed middle-aged white male husband, who has never experienced discrimination in his life, also doesn't believe there is a gap.

After working in the IT industry for 15 years I beg to differ.

Life is too short to remove USB safely.

khull

1245 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 137

Reply # 1477273 23-Jan-2016 12:36

2 people support this post

Here we go again.

gzt

9608 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1409

Reply # 1477276 23-Jan-2016 12:38

khull: Here we go again.

I don't recall this discussion taking place on Geekzone before.

jmh

449 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 142

Subscriber

Reply # 1477295 23-Jan-2016 13:03

One person supports this post

Geektastic: There's no genuine gap.

If you measure a man and a woman with the same years of experience, same qualifications and same talent. Also ignore things like nipping off to have kids, causing inconvenience and cost to businesses and thus making yourself less attractive as an employee.

What the ranters want would eventually result in higher pay for women just for being women.

My wife earned well into six figures for the last 3 years, so know it's perfectly possible for women to earn far more than many men.

I guess all of those who do OE or are casual contracting should also be paid less because of the lower number of hours they have clocked in. In fact, people who stay in companies a long time should be paid more than those who leave every 3 to 4 years, which is an inconvenience to the business. Funny enough, it doesn't seem to work that way.

Punishing a woman for taking a couple of years off, in a career often lasting 40+ years, with lower pay for her whole life seems a bit mean.

My own experience is that women, overall, are paid less because they don't push hard enough for the top jobs and don't ask for pay rises. I see this all the time. When looking at job adverts, men tend to apply when they meet about half of the criteria. Many women won't apply unless they meet all of them, so in the end they take fewer risks and don't get the rewards. Once coached and mentored to aim higher and ask for raises, they can achieve better jobs and pay.

pctek

528 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 75

Reply # 1477400 23-Jan-2016 16:13

One person supports this post

kiwifidget:

My self-employed middle-aged white male husband, who has never experienced discrimination in his life, also doesn't believe there is a gap.

After working in the IT industry for 15 years I beg to differ.

I worked in IT too. I am female.

F&P, Akld Uni, Web Drive.

I was paid the same as my male colleagues (except for long time people or people in more senior roles)

I asked. In fact Web Drive, one colleague, after the rest of us got a pay rise and he didn't, bitched about it - he'd had a pay rise a while before, ours was adjust for market rates thing - bit unfair I guess as he then was on the same as us.

Only govt place I ever worked for was a hospital. 3 of us wwere taken on temp as general IT dogsbodies.

I asked for $18 an hr, I got $15 an hr. I got a bit of stick about it as the other 2 - guys - had got $12. (This was ages ago remember, pay rates considerably lower)

tdgeek

11665 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2007

Trusted

Reply # 1477411 23-Jan-2016 17:07

mattwnz:
Those sorts of stats don't tell the full story. They may have more men working in the higher ranked / higher paid jobs, and more woman in the lower ranked positions. If that is the case, then it is easy to see why 'on average' womans wages are less. But that doesn't mean woman are paid less at all when you compare position with position. It is really the media looking at any angle they can to come up with such a heading. Stats can be easily read to suit.

Perfect post, you could close the thread based on this post.

You need to get jobs where the quali, length of service and standing * are the same.

Standing is that each pay review some get rewarded more than others, and over time % on % joints up. To define a policy where a male and female are equal and we pay the dude more is hard if not impossible to get from group stats.

old3eyes

7763 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 765

Subscriber

Reply # 1477412 23-Jan-2016 17:12

2 people support this post

I believe male fashion models get paid about half what the female ones get..

Regards,

Old3eyes

tdgeek

11665 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2007

Trusted

Reply # 1477413 23-Jan-2016 17:17

old3eyes:
I believe male fashion models get paid about half what the female ones get..

There is an Aussie guy that does both, wonder what happens there. True.

Sideface

3953 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2104

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 1477428 23-Jan-2016 17:35

One person supports this post

tdgeek:
old3eyes:

I believe male fashion models get paid about half what the female ones get..

There is an Aussie guy that does both, wonder what happens there. True.

He gets time and a half.

Sideface

DarthKermit

Talk DIrtY to me
4210 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2248

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1477433 23-Jan-2016 18:05

old3eyes:

I believe male fashion models get paid about half what the female ones get..

I've heard the same for male vs. female porno stars.

TwoSeven

1212 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 115

Reply # 1477463 23-Jan-2016 19:48

One person supports this post

Geektastic: There's no genuine gap.

If you measure a man and a woman with the same years of experience, same qualifications and same talent. Also ignore things like nipping off to have kids, causing inconvenience and cost to businesses and thus making yourself less attractive as an employee.

What the ranters want would eventually result in higher pay for women just for being women.

My wife earned well into six figures for the last 3 years, so know it's perfectly possible for women to earn far more than many men.

I think you may be doing what many of us blokes do and repeating stuff we may have been told by other blokes, rather than actually looking at empirical studies that probably disagree with your initial statement. I might point out that what is possible for a few, isn't necessarily the norm for everyone else.

I support gender equality and would probably call myself a feminist - when I started to learn about why [gender] inequality exists I started to notice more of it around, from the way people talk, the jokes people make and often the way they are treated by the media. I think stereotyping is big part of this issue, it generally runs along the line of women cant do something or are bad/men can do it or are good - usually with some kind of justification attached to it. I would like to see these stereotypes broken down and gotten rid of. I think people should have the opportunity to be everything they can be, without having to deal with peoples perception of their capabilities that are based solely on what gender they are.

I think gender can be defined as the 'social attributes and opportunities associated with being male or female'. So what us ranters are really asking for is that both genders have 'equal rights, opportunities and responsibilities and that these should not depend on whether someone is born male or female' - neither does it mean that men and women have to become the same as each other. I think that we also need to recognise there are industries where the equality goes against men, but I would suggest that the majority of the inequality is directed against women

Personally, I would like to see more women in software engineering, I would like to see more female F1 drivers, women's soccer given more time on TV, more scientists, more mathematicians and physicists, electronics experts, engineers and mechanics - the opportunity for women to be able to play the leading role in movies (that are not just about relationships) are the superhero (and the list goes on).

Given that I think gender equality still has a long way to go, I would find it very hard to say there isn't a pay gap at all.

Software Engineer

Geektastic

11064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3482

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1477581 23-Jan-2016 22:39

jmh:

Geektastic: There's no genuine gap.

If you measure a man and a woman with the same years of experience, same qualifications and same talent. Also ignore things like nipping off to have kids, causing inconvenience and cost to businesses and thus making yourself less attractive as an employee.

What the ranters want would eventually result in higher pay for women just for being women.

My wife earned well into six figures for the last 3 years, so know it's perfectly possible for women to earn far more than many men.

I guess all of those who do OE or are casual contracting should also be paid less because of the lower number of hours they have clocked in. In fact, people who stay in companies a long time should be paid more than those who leave every 3 to 4 years, which is an inconvenience to the business. Funny enough, it doesn't seem to work that way.

Punishing a woman for taking a couple of years off, in a career often lasting 40+ years, with lower pay for her whole life seems a bit mean.

My own experience is that women, overall, are paid less because they don't push hard enough for the top jobs and don't ask for pay rises. I see this all the time. When looking at job adverts, men tend to apply when they meet about half of the criteria. Many women won't apply unless they meet all of them, so in the end they take fewer risks and don't get the rewards. Once coached and mentored to aim higher and ask for raises, they can achieve better jobs and pay.

No one punishes anyone with low pay.

If woman A works 35 years and man A works 40, man A will earn more. Therefore there must be a gender pay gap.....

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8