Gender Feminist Wage Gap Myth Appears to be Growing Legs, Part II

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2007/04/23/the-gender-feminist-wage-gap-myth-appears-to-be-growing-legs/

“Overall, the regression analysis of earnings one year after graduation suggests that a 5 percent pay gap between women and men remains after accounting for all variables known to affect earnings.”

According to that explanation women make 95% of the 100% that men make.

“Women make only 80 percent of the salaries their male peers do one year after college…”

According to this, as reported on from the AAUW study, women make 80% of the 100% that men make.

Historically, in our capitalistic country the price of labor has been based on “supply and demand,” and if you can get more for your labor at another work place a lot of bosses will tell you, ”More power to you.”  The history of my 30 + year work career has been made up of a number of jobs that I’ve used like rungs in a ladder to get the next higher salary, or the next better working conditions, depending on what I was looking for at the time.

But back to the topic at hand… Neither 80%, nor 95% (whichever number gender feminists are using this week) equals 100%, so what is the exact gender feminist rationale explaining the “wage gap,” if not the cultural Marxist concept of  “comparable worth.”

According to comparable worth, if I’m a woman and I get paid 100 nuts for the 80 nuts worth of  ”supply and demand” work I perform, and your a man and you get paid 100 nuts for the 100 nuts worth of  ”supply and demand” work you perform, is that how it’s supposed to work (based on the AAUW gender normed, comparable worth, job model)?

http://www.aauw.org/issue_advocacy/actionpages/documents/payequityResourceKit.pdf

Pp. 8 and Pp. 9 of this AAUW Pay Equity Resource Kit alleges this explanation for the wage gap:

“Consider that women’s wages today are still only about 66 percent of men’s wages. Studies show that factors such as seniority, reduced hours for child care, and maternity leave cannot account for the significant wage gap between men and women.   Much of this gap, it appears, is due to large differences between wages paid for traditionally “men’s jobs” and those paid for “women’s jobs.”   Comparable worth has been promoted by feminists and advocates of women’s rights as the most significant new tool in the struggle to bring women’s economic positions up to the level of men’s.

Like school bussing and affirmative action, comparable worth is a strategy that attempts to correct past injustices. But implementation of comparable worth risks imposing new costs on society, and raises new questions. Should public and private employers restructure their wage scales, at some costs to themselves–and possibly to society at large–in order to achieve just compensation based on the comparable worth doctrine?”

And still another site alleges this explanation of comparable worth:

http://www.payequityresearch.com/worth.htm

Comparable Worth (also called pay equity) – A reform effort to pay different job titles the same based on their value to their employer regardless of the gender predominance of those working in such titles.

At the heart of comparable worth or pay equity is the fact that jobs traditionally done by women have been systematically undervalued in the marketplace. The net result is that jobs disproportionately held by women are paid less than comparable jobs with the same levels of skills and responsibilities but commonly held by males.  This bias against women’s work can be demonstrated and subsequently eliminated by assessing the economic value of different jobs through the use of gender-neutral job evaluation systems.   For example, secretarial and janitorial jobs can be compared on dimensions such as the education/training needed, the working conditions, the responsibility involved and effort required.

I suspect “the AAUW ’gender neutral’ model” for determining the comparable worth of jobs with the same skill levels and responsibilities would speak volumes about the conclusions reached by the AAUW study.

One things for sure, if some of the “cush” women’s jobs start getting the same pay as the brutal jobs men have historically taken to support their families, there are going to be a whole lot of crumby, previously “men’s jobs,” going begging for a person to fill them, in my opinion.

The cultural Marxist concept of “comparable worth” is just as close as your ballot box, and the next Presidential election.   Does the woman (on the left) on this old Soviet, labor medal coincidentally resemble the Hillary Clinton I see in the video linked below, or am I getting eye strain from being on my computer too long?