Pay Equity And Women In Lowest Level Jobs; Minimum Wage And The GOP

Pay Equity, Minimum Wage and the woman worker…… John F. Kennedy had foresight on inequity for women in the workplace.

“[W]e have by no means done enough to strengthen family life and at the same time encourage women to make their full contribution as citizens. If our nation is to be successful in the critical period ahead, we must rely upon the skills and devotion of all our people. … It is appropriate at this time … to review recent accomplishments, and to acknowledge frankly the further steps that must be taken. This is a task for the entire nation.”

504 – Statement by the President on the Establishment of the President’s Commission on the Status of Women.
December 14, 1961
_________________________

Ah, the beauty of reflection to a time when ideology and working towards a great future was like a rose budding to blossom and casting a “hopeful” shadow across the nation. Hopeful regarding…..

The Status of Women
    Civil Rights: “Out of Jim Crow”
       Concern for the poor and underprivileged
           The hope of Fair Pay for women and minorities
               Eventual War that would unleash a societal evolution
                   Booming manufacturing
                        Off-shoring jobs wasn’t on the radar screen
                             The Kochs did not have a grip on the GOP

And, all before the nation turned to Richard Nixon and the new GOP and 1970s neo-conservative ideology. The beautiful blossoming rose prematurely withered with the eventual election of Ronald Reagan. The Father of Modern Conservatism administered with regressive conservative ideology and policy to reverse growing social change. Reagan and his party initiated federal policy that led to (protective) moats for US industrialist. Ultimately, his economic policies fueled development of a US “income caste system.”

Since the Reagan Era, the nation has experienced Civil and Human Rights paradigms akin to that of pre-1960s social Dark Ages. Paradigms that have metastasized with the election of Barack Obama to a social phenomenon one can only call a rebirth of unabashed racism. Racism actually practiced and broadcast by well-viewed media (Fox News) and manifest like a completely soaked sponge around the fringe of the GOP (and the libertarian movement). The socially deprived seem to use media (eg., talk radio and Fox News) to feed from the sponge as social oppression permeates to the core of US conservative ideology. The permeating sponge represents the growth of “isms” that at one time was moved to the “back-40” of the US social landscape. Did I mention pay equity, the Minimum Wage and women?

People who practice or perpetrate “isms” carry then around in bundles. You will not find a racist who is free of homophobia. You will only rarely find a person suffering from homophobia who is free of the ravages of sexism. I further posit, you will not find a person infested with sexism who will rally around or champion fair and equal pay for women. Maybe less pronounced, but women who live in such environments know it is a reality.

Sexism has become such a worldwide norm women’s pay equity issues in industrialized nations are completely ignored. In the United States, millions ignore the male to female pay ratio of women earning $.77 for every dollar earned by her male cohorts. Women are also guilty complacency in acceptance of pay inequity.  When women in the millions do themselves great harm when they vote for a party that cares as much about pay-equity as it cares about climate issues. Indifferent women literally enable one of US societies’ most virulent “isms.” Pay inequality with women occupying the majority of lower level jobs, and receiving the lowest levels of pay, is the epitome of sexism.

Read more after the break below

How is it possible the following is so easy to ignore? Let’s start with the perfect high-end example: the woman Chief Executive Officer (CEO). In the summer of 2013, Bloomberg reviewed the S&P 500 top executives and found a 17% disparity in women CEO Pay and average CEO pay.  The following table shows a mixed bag, but the message is clear. 

If industrialist and Wall Street executives pay women at the highest levels moderately less than her male counterparts, do you think those power-brokers have concern for lower end employees?  The question is rhetorical, we know what they do and the evidence is easy to locate.

First, know that women occupy the majority of lower paid jobs.  A look back 50 years.

Women comprise 53% of the workforce. Seventy per cent of mothers work to support a family.   Since the mid 1960s, the income disparity (gap) has kept pace with increases in pay among various race and gender demographic groups. Progress in reducing the gap doe snot exist; actually the gap has every so slightly widened. The following chart unfortunately ends in 2008, but we have major suspicion the trend lines continue as delineated in the chart. Fabulous Broke Dot Com 

Last summer the White House published a report from a National Equal Pay Task Force. 

The LA Times June 13, 2013

The conclusion? The top professions among women haven’t changed all that much over the last half century. Women are still more likely than men to work minimum-wage or low-pay service jobs. 

In 1960, the top five leading occupations for women were private household workers, secretaries, sales clerks, elementary school teachers and bookkeepers. 

In 2010, the leading categories haven’t changed much. The top five are secretaries, nurses, elementary and high school teachers, cashiers and retail clerks. 

The report found male-dominated jobs that do not require higher education still often pay more than the kinds of jobs mostly taken up by women.

A National Equal Pay Task Force table shows clear evidence of job level regression (over the past 30 years) and it shows women occupy many lower paying jobs.

The Obama Administration has nudged pay disparity among men and actual women closer to equity, but a stubborn gap remains.

The Society of Human Resources Management June 13, 2013

Women’s Pay Still Lags Behind Men’s Excerpt The day the Equal Pay Act was signed into law, women earned, on average, 59 cents for every dollar a man earned. “Today it’s about 77 cents,” President Obama said on June 10, 2013, in the East Room of the White House. “So, it was 59 and now it’s 77 cents. It’s even less, by the way, if you’re an African-American or a Latina.”  The president pressed for Congress to “step up and pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, so women have better tools to fight for equal pay for equal work.”  Occupational Segregation The pay disparity is due, in part, to women continuing to fill lower-paying jobs because of “occupational segregation.” The report listed the top 10 occupations women fill:  Secretaries and administrative assistants. Professional nurses. Elementary- and middle-school teachers. Cashiers. Retail salespersons. Nursing, psychiatric and home health aides. Waitresses. First-line supervisors and managers of retail salespersons. Customer-service representatives. Maids.  Male-dominated professions requiring a high school diploma or a bachelor’s degree or higher continue to pay more than fields with a high concentration of women.  For example, the three most common male-dominated jobs requiring a high school diploma—brick mason, tool and die maker, and plumber—provide average salaries of $45,410, $39,910 and $46,660, respectively. By contrast, the top three female-dominated jobs requiring a high school diploma—secretary, child care worker and hairdresser—offer average salaries of $34,660, $19,300 and $22,500, respectively.  Occupations are segregated by gender in professions requiring a bachelor’s degree or higher, the report added, and the male-dominated jobs are paid more.  The three most common male-dominated jobs requiring a higher-education degree—mechanical engineer, computer-control programmer and operator, and aerospace engineer—provide average salaries of $78,160, $71,380 and $97,480, respectively.  The top female-dominated professions requiring a higher-education degree—speech-language pathologist, occupational therapist and dietitian—provide average salaries of $66,920, $72,320 and $53,250, respectively.  Read more linked above

Since women occupy more lower paying jobs than men, even when the male has less education, isn’t that a form of disparate impact? Disparate impact is against federal Fair Employment Law. Raising the Minimum wage could seriously offset the $.77 to $1.00 female/male pay ratio.

If the GOP is against raising the Minimum Wage, the GOP accepts unequal pay with the reality of disparate impact on women. Some prefer use of softer language, but we call that a “War on Women.”

The war is also perpetrated against you and me. 

We shouldn’t be forced to live and experience the reality of the graphic just above. Your daughter, wife, aunt or Grandmother shouldn’t have to labor in lowering paying jobs while being paid a wage below the poverty level. They work in jobs with male co-workers possibly earning more for doing the same job. Many women work more than one job to simply help make ends meet.   

If 70 plus percent of survey respondents believe the Minimum Wage should be higher than $7.25 per hour and we are faced with what you have just read, how can anyone in the GOP say there is no “war on women” from the Right. 

Why is the party on the Right so out of touch with the wishes of the American people. 

Pay Equity and clear evidence that some do not like calling ‘war on women’

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker is again attacking the rights of working people.  His latest foray into human deprivation strikes women and minorities while also impacting older white males. 

The first piece of legislation signed into federal law by then newly inaugurated President Obama was the Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act.  A few words about Ms. Ledbetter from Wikipedia.

Lilly Ledbetter was a supervisor at Goodyear Tire and Rubber’s plant in Gadsden, Alabama, from 1979 until her retirement in 1998. For most of those years, she worked as an area manager, a position largely occupied by men. Initially, Ledbetter’s salary was in line with the salaries of men performing substantially similar work. Over time, however, her pay slipped in comparison to the pay of male area managers with equal or less seniority. By the end of 1997, Ledbetter was the only woman working as an area manager and the pay discrepancy between Ledbetter and her 15 male counterparts was stark: Ledbetter was paid $3,727 per month; the lowest paid male area manager received $4,286 per month, the highest paid, $5,236.^[4] This pay disparity led to further inequity in her “overtime pay, contributory retirement, 401(k), and social security.” ^[5]

As a professional who worked well over a quarter century in Human Resources Management, rest assured Ledbetter does not stand alone as a victim of corporate America.  Corporate America and the ‘guardians’ of secrecy and illusion relative to pay are very adroit at practicing their craft.  They are the ‘bosses’ (supervisor, managers and directors) who foster, maintain and nourish systems of pay inequity, the Human Resources professionals who allow such discrimination, and the corporate entity (itself) that has existed with sanctioned inequities towards women and minorities.  

When asked by an MSNBC show host how she learned of the pay inequity Ms. Ledbetter indicated she was given an anonymous note. Whether she is covering for someone of not, pay inequity was discovered and eventually litigated.   She found out about the pay inequity (discrimination) because someone recognized the ‘wrong’ and took affirmative steps to alert the victim.  Think of the millions who know of such practices (and other discriminatory practices) and do not speak-out or come forth. They sit and reap the benefits of victimization of another; thus they are also enablers. 

Pay discrimination is as real as the 9AM to 5 PM workday.  Pay is an area that is, by policy cloaked in secrecy and is very difficult to discover and prove than other forms of discrimination against women.

One glaring example of corporate discrimination against women was in promotion and hiring rates.  Until recently the number of women who held top level leadership positions  (CEOs) languished in the realm of three (1) percent.  The number today approaches three to four (3 to 4) per cent, but when factored against the fact that 46% to 52% of the workforce is female, event that 10% figures is a red flag. Those figures can only represent some form of discrimination even if it is as simple as the ‘good ol boy’ network.  While the percent of top level executive is one obvious and easily verifiable statistic, pay inequity is, but another monster.  If you have worked for any company in America, you know the sharing rates of pay is an unforgivable infraction on policy. Well, there are many and serious reasons for hiding pay rates.  One reason facilitates pay inequity.  There are many other reasons, but differentiation in pay is only possible if people are forbidden from pay comparison.

Relevant sources of data:

I. Viteiello Communications Group Data (April 2011)

Statistics show that 76 percent of all American women ages 25-54 are in the workforce; 2 – 3 percent of them are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. This “leaky talent pipeline” negatively affects the nation’s ability to unlock its full economic potential.

II. Women on Business

New U.S. Women in Business Statistics Released by Catalyst

By Susan Gunelius

Catalyst released some interesting statistics about women in business in the United States this month. Check out some of the information available in the Catalyst U.S. Women in Business report:

• Percentage of women in the U.S. labor force:
 46.3%

• Percentage of women in management, professional and related occupations:
 50.6%

• Percentage of female Fortune 500 corporate officers:
 15.4%

• Percentage of female Fortune 500 board seats:
 14.8%

• Percentage of female Fortune 500 top earners:
 6.7%

• Percentage of female Fortune 500 CEOs:
 2.4%

Here are some statistics from the Catalyst Women CEOs of the Fortune 1000 report:

• Number of female CEOs of Fortune 500 companies:
 12

• Number of female CEOs in Fortune 501-1000 companies:
 10

• Total female CEOS in Fortune 1000 companies:
 22

Looks like the business world has a long way to go to reach anything close to equality in leadership.  Your thoughts?

III. USA Today (Article excerpt)

This year, there were 98 female CEOs of 3,049 publicly traded companies analyzed by research company GMI. That represents 3.2% of the total company CEOs and is just slightly above the 3.1% from last year and 2.9% from 2009. 

Female CEOs represent just about 3% of Fortune 500 company heads. 

In 2009, women held 15.2% of Fortune 500 board seats, according to women’s issues research group Catalyst. In both 2009 and 2010, 12% of Fortune 500 companies had no women serving on their boards.

Two sources of data reflecting Women CEOs occupy less than 5% of all CEOs.  Is it a leap to estimate the African-Americans occupy an equal or probably smaller number?  Although the sources above are careful not to lay the basis of their screeds on discrimination against women, I have far less reticence.  If women occupy close to 50% of the workforce with the number of women CEOs showing less than five percent, the data can be viewed in not other way.


Now, let’s move back to Pay equity.


President Obama made the issue a first step in his administration for a few reasons. Fairness was a catalyst foundation and other reason may have developed from that point. If we contrast our president’s first official act post inauguration with the central issue of this screed the void is deep and it cannot be simply breached by words or rhetoric.


Curtain up on Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s latest attack on working people; in this case specifically women and minorities. Over the past few weeks MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow has reported on Governor Scott Walkers repeal of the Wisconsin Fair Pay Act.   Today’s addition of the Maddow BLOG includes another detailed piece from the very talented Steve Benen.: GOP explains opposition to fair pay laws.

Last week, Pete Hoekstra, the Republicans’ U.S. Senate hopeful in Michigan, called the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay law “a nuisance” that should be stripped from the books. This week in New Hampshire, state Republican Party Executive Director Tory Mazzola, a top Romney campaign, said the law is little more than “a handout to trial lawyers.” 

Other surrogates for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, rushed out to defend Mitt Romney’s record on women’s issues, despite their opposition to the Ledbetter law. 

And then there’s Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), who quietly repealed a state version of the Fair Pay law two weeks ago, and explained his reasoning yesterday. 

Walker defended the repeal in an interview Tuesday with WLUK-TV, saying the Equal Pay Enforcement Act had essentially been nothing but a boon for trial lawyers. His comments came on Equal Pay Day 2012, the day when a typical woman’s earnings catch the pay of male counterparts in 2011. 

“In the past, lawyers could clog up the legal system,” Walker said. “Instead, the state Department of Workforce Development gets to be the one that ultimately can put people back and give them up to two years back pay if there is reason to believe there was pay discrimination in the workforce.” 

So, Walker has decided to take the power out of the hands of women and their legal representatives, and instead put the power in the hands of … the Walker administration.

Benen’s piece also explores reaction from Lilly Ledbetter regarding the GOP and Walker’s obviouslegaltive malfeasance. 

Walker’s horrible discriminatory act further exemplifies how the GOP has little regard from factually evidence the women are paid $.77 for every $1.00 paid to males in comparable positions. Despite clear evidence via the Ledbetter Court case, walker reaches into his bag of ALEC based anti- tort positions against trial lawyers. 

As I close this screed, I reflect on reports that some Democratic lawmakers are less than fond of the seemingly accurate mantra,”GOP war on women”. I would love for one of those Democrats (who are obviously pandering to conservative constituent groups) explain how Walker’s actions can be viewed in any other way.