Dr. Warren Farrell on the gender pay gap

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m a social worker, (currently a SAHM), and we get exposed to a number of volatile and even violent populations. Thank you for bringing this up.
Here’s a piece about the risks of working in the special education classroom, and how hazardous it can be to be a low-paid aide (special ed teachers are about 85% women, with presumably similar numbers for aides).


“Years went by, and we would hear special education paraprofessionals [that means aides] confide in low tones how they were getting hit, kicked, spat upon, scratched and screamed at by their students.”

"A student wearing heavy boots kicked Beth (not her real name), a veteran special ed assistant, in the head. Her concussion left her with a stutter and post-traumatic stress.

"Despite another student’s individual education plan (IEP) that said no one was to come within four feet of him, special ed assistant Christopher (again, not his name) was knowingly ordered to sit next to this student, who gouged the para’s eyes, dislodging his surgically implanted lens. Eventually, the lens had to be removed, leaving him visually impaired.

"Many paras like Monica McCanna have been punched and kicked by students who outweigh them by 100 pounds or more.

“When Christopher, now reassigned, reported continuing violence to the district’s special ed coordinator, he was told that violence comes with the job.”

“When protective equipment is promised, it needs to be delivered. “Nothing got ordered for any of our people last year,” says paraprofessional Kathy Forbes, who worked in a room where a student tried to strangle a teacher.”

“When school employees are hurt, school administrators need to help. Not roll their eyes when paras ask for a sick day to recover from bruises and sprains. Not give paras the runaround on workers’ compensation—Beth’s district evaded providing answers for months on her workers’ comp claim. Only after OSEA hired a lawyer was the claim approved.”

“Federal and state laws require employers to keep workplaces safe. The problem is that elementary and secondary schools are designated as “safe workplaces” and partially exempt under federal law. That’s because the “safe” designation came before schools were required to accept nearly all students—even those with a history of violence—and during a bygone era with more staff, like counselors.”

“That’s why no federal agency knows the extent of the violence. That’s why in Oregon, school districts don’t have to report most injuries inflicted on staff.”

“In Oregon’s Redmond School District, employees told OSHA they were harmed routinely. The school district discouraged them from reporting; it didn’t want bad publicity. But a subsequent OSHA investigation found incident reports stuffed into desk drawers or filed away and not dealt with.”

“Our members are coming forward. Last December, OSEA activists got the ear of their governor. They told Gov. Kate Brown about how a few students hit, bite and kick other students and educators, and about the union’s Work Shouldn’t Hurt campaign.”
 
I’ve worjed retail. It’s really not.
Starbucks is kind of crazy. Have you seen the workers simultaneously taking orders on their headsets while preparing and handing over different orders? That would drive me nuts.
 
I don’t personally believe there is a gender pay gap, outside of males and females making different career choices.

If you want to talk about sexism in the work place, let’s talk about child care… I used to teach preschool before my own childcare became too expensive (they pay preschool teachers min wage, but charge almost 600 dollars a week for tuition of two kids). I can tell you, that at least in my local area, no preschool will EVER hire a man. They absolutely will not. It is a career that only hires women.

They do this because there is this fear shared between staff and parents, that if they start hiring men, the children will get molested by one.

Personally- I think it’s a natural instinct to want women being the primary nurturers for young children. It doesn’t bother me, but I would like to point out that if a career field wouldn’t hire women… it would be social war and all over the news in seconds flat! There would be a major outcry! No one seems to bat an eye that there is a whole career field that alienates men from getting jobs…

Kind of a double standard…
 
Last edited:
I don’t personally believe there is a gender pay gap, outside of males and females making different career choices.

If you want to talk about sexism in the work place, let’s talk about child care… I used to teach preschool before my own childcare became too expensive (they pay preschool teachers min wage, but charge almost 600 dollars a week for tuition of two kids). I can tell you, that at least in my local area, no preschool will EVER hire a man. They absolutely will not. It is a career that only hires women.

They do this because there is this fear shared between staff and parents, that if they start hiring men, the children will get molested by one.

Personally- I think it’s a natural instinct to want women being the primary nurturers for young children. It doesn’t bother me, but I would like to point out that if a career field wouldn’t hire women… it would be social war and all over the news in seconds flat! There would be a major outcry! No one seems to bat an eye that there is a whole career field that alienates men from getting jobs…

Kind of a double standard…
Not just “kind of.” If it were a lucrative or high-status field or if there were not unfortunately so many molesters who do target child-care situations, I think the outcry from men would be there. If even the other men aren’t complaining as a whole, those men who feel discriminated against will have a hard time of it.

That does not mean it is fair to men who would like to be in the field. It probably does mean that other men aren’t going to bat for the few that want to be in this field. Having said that, when there is a concern of sexual molestation or sexual voyeurism of course people are barred from serving the opposite sex in particular capacities. In that same vein, it is not surprising that the gender with very few applying and an unfortunately high number of those who do apply doing so for the wrong reasons there is a prejudice against all applicants from that gender.

I think there are a lot of pay gaps and treatment gaps that have to do with unexamined and unintended favortism. Having said that…life isn’t fair. It is important to get rid of the most egregious forms of institutional unfairness, but life is never going to be totally “fair.”
 
Last edited:
I’m not saying it’s not hard work. But it’s not skilled work.
 
Yeah, that is totally the result of a sexist conspiracy not just a reflection of the fact that most retail work is unskilled.
I wasn’t saying that it was. People were wondering why don’t employers take advantage of women’s discounted labor, and I was pointing out that they already do with regard to low-paid employees. In fact, employers do so even in situations (special education) where functionally speaking, it actually makes sense to have more big, strong male employees.

But in the case of special education, schools probably can’t afford to pay the kind of wages that would keep male employees showing up to work, as special education is very labor intensive. Special education aide pay is around $25k a year, and school districts that have a lot of aides wind up with sky high per-student costs.


In low-paying jobs, you can typically get a better female employee for the same money. (That’s been my relatives’ experience hiring for retail jobs.)
Married men live longer because they have someone around to call 911. You can get the same result with a roommate.
Cite?
The result is that women are in safer but lower paying jobs while men are in riskier and higher paying careers.
A lot of women work primarily to provide health insurance for their families. There’s also a bit of a sweet spot in nursing and K-12 education, where you get both solid pay, a set schedule, and good benefits. Those jobs continue to be very popular with women.

https://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/most_common_occupations_for_women.htm

It’s also important to note that back during the 2008 recession, male workers initially suffered a lot more than female workers, as construction is just much more volatile.

Here are the top 4 most popular jobs for women from the Department of Labor:

–“Elementary and middle school teachers”
–“Registered nurses”
–“Secretaries and administrative assistants”
–“Nursing, psychiatric, and home health aides”

Obviously, that’s not the whole story of female employment in the US in 2018, but that list strongly resembles the situation circa 1958.

It’s also true that women (especially mothers of small children) need to manage their energy levels so that they can come home from work and be physically active and productive for another 5-7 hours. Mothers (and children) can’t afford for mothers to give it their all at work and then come home and flop (as I remember my dad doing when I was a kid, and as he still does).

There’s also the practicality that certain jobs are disproportionately dangerous for pregnant ladies and unborn babies–like anything involving toxic chemicals or going up on ladders.
 
Last edited:
40.png
phil19034:
The reason why, as a group (not individually), women make less is because many women still take time off to raise kids.
So then you’re basically admitting that there is a real pay gap and giving a reason for it. The obvious way to remedy the injustice would be to instigate a system of paid parental leave.

But outside of your anecdotal experience, the argument is flawed, anyway. The primary reason that women leave jobs isn’t to have families but because they aren’t getting paid enough to begin with. Why So Many Thirtysomething Women Are Leaving Your Company In other words, institutionalized sexism in the form of a pay gap is there well before women start having babies.
This article doesn’t support what it’s trying to support.

Today, Millennials (and a good portion of Generation X - which I’m part of) jump from job to job every few years to chase higher dollars.

In today’s business environment, that’s how most grow their salaries quickly (esp if they don’t have a family to worry about). These younger people 20 somethings and 30 somethings are willing to take chances with a new job to increase their salary.

When I was in the corporate world, we gave more big raises to top employees after they gave their 2 weeks notice than we did as a regular course of business.

In many corporate jobs, getting a new job offer is who you advance pay wise. You tell you employer about the office when you give your two weeks and you currently employer either matches/beats it or you leave for more money.

That’s how it works today.

The article is ignoring the fact that women DO quit working to be stay at home mom’s and women so quit to take work at home jobs.

I will address paid parental leave in another post.
 
So then you’re basically admitting that there is a real pay gap and giving a reason for it. The obvious way to remedy the injustice would be to instigate a system of paid parental leave.
First, I agree that paid parental leave is a necessary benefit. As a father, I had it and took advantage of it. Also, my jobs allowed me to work from home after I returned for several weeks to easy my way back to work (but my job can be done remotely).

Paid parental leave should be a must.

However, the question is how long should an employeer be FORCED to pay an employee on leave? When an employee has a medical issue, there is only so long the employeer has to pay before the injured person goes on short term or long term disability.

A “parental care insurance plan” isn’t going to be a viable insurance product (plus it honestly sends the wrong message). So how long can we expect employeers to pay people who are not at work?

Is it realistic to expect employeers to pay new mothers longer than they pay people who got injured on the job?

Im totally in favor of paid parental leave. And I’m totally in favor of allowing people to work from home (assuming it’s possible).

But how much paid leave becomes a financial burden & liablity to a company? Afterall, they can only afford to pay people when they are still in business. When people go on parental leave, the company makes a choice … pay temps to cover for them or make due with one less person (putting more work & stress on other employees).

Each company knows where their breaking point is, and I comend all employeers who go beyond the minimum. If I was a small business owner, I would pay as long as I could afford it (beyond the legal minimum). But I would hate to be forced to pay a longer legal minimum that caused me to close my doors.

The truth is this: becoming parents today is more of financial sacrifice because we typically work outside the home instead of in home. While kids can still help around the house, they can’t get paid jobs like they used to and they typically can’t help their parents at work like they used to as well. And parents can’t send their kids away for free to be apprentices anymore either. Same with sending them to monasteries or convents for education.

My point - kids used to be a financial asset, today they are not. We have to understand and accept that kids are a financial sacrifice today - but a sacrifice well worth it.

God Bless
 
Today, Millennials (and a good portion of Generation X - which I’m part of) jump from job to job every few years to chase higher dollars.

In today’s business environment, that’s how most grow their salaries quickly (esp if they don’t have a family to worry about).
…or if their family is willing to come along for the ride.

A wife who dutifully quits her job for the sake of maximizing her husband’s career and picks up the pieces in a new location, and perhaps does that repeatedly, is going to wind up with seriously depressed earnings. (This works for the trailing male spouse, too, of course.)
 
Because its a secret practice with information asymmetry. The 2008 censes in America confirms the pay gap quite clearly.

The whole pay gap thing is a perfect example about how spreading awareness helps to solve a problem by shining light on bad business practices.
The problem you are describing was mostly addressed from 1970’s to 1990’s.

Now the problem is primarily about career choices.
 
I heard a priest make a very good (and funny) comment on this topic - to paraphrase:

“At the Fall, Eve’s punishment was to suffer pain in childbirth, and Adam’s was that he would be forced to provide for himself by the sweat of his brow… why would women want to take on BOTH punishments!?”
No offense, but I don’t see the relation between this statement and equal pay for women. I don’t believe one has anything to do with the other.
 
This article doesn’t support what it’s trying to support.

Today, Millennials (and a good portion of Generation X - which I’m part of) jump from job to job every few years to chase higher dollars.
Respectfully, it does appear to support the notion that statistically speaking, women are primarily leaving to seek higher pay, not to have babies.

As for millenials in general, this article does a good job parsing the data for men and women on their job retention patterns. Enough Already About The Job-Hopping Millennials | FiveThirtyEight

There’s no longer a traditional career ladder. Pensions have been replaced with 401Ks, raises with bonuses, and PPOs with egregiously high deductible CDHPs. I’ll address that with your parental leave post.
 
Today, Millennials (and a good portion of Generation X - which I’m part of)
I’m going to stop you right there, there is no such thing as generations. whats more there is no reason to identify which part you are in either unless you feel that another generation (which doesn’t exist but I’ll roll with it) is different then yours which they are not.
 
A “parental care insurance plan” isn’t going to be a viable insurance product (plus it honestly sends the wrong message). So how long can we expect employeers to pay people who are not at work?
My extended family is full of small business owners, so I consider your question a valid point that hits home.

The greatest impediment to paid parental leave is this national heist that is employer-based health insurance. Indeed, it is also the greatest obstacle to our nation’s time-honored entrepreneurial tradition. How many of us could start our own businesses if we didn’t have that awful health insurance question lurking over our heads? With health care costs soaring to new heights and insurance companies and hospital administrators laughing their way to the bank, it’s only going to get worse. At this point, I’ll settle for anything- socialized medicine, single-payer, or the Libertarian solution of free market insurance - over the rabidly dysfunctional “system” that we have in place. If employers were free of this burden, they could focus on a benefit as vital as paid parental leave.
 
As long as there is no pay gap, then nothing wrong is happening. People seem to think there is something wrong happening. Perhaps they are liers. It’s not like i am omniscient. I will leave it in God’s hands.
 
Quite right, you might note that several people observed that shortly after my post, and I subsequently explained the reason for the disparity. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top