Posted on Aug 30, 2017
2
2
0
WOW! I just can't imagine someone endorsing discrimination in any capacity when you are suppose to represent all Americans. SGM Matthew Quick CPT Aaron Kletzing SGT (Join to see) PFC Kyle Corcoran 1LT Sandy Annala Sgt Tammy Wallace SSgt Robert Marx Col Joel Anderson
Ivanka Backs Trump Administration's Plan to Scrap Obama Rules Preventing Pay Discrimination
Posted from yahoo.com
Discrimination
Donald Trump
Barack Obama
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 11
7
7
0
In all my working years I have NEVER seen pay discrimination for people doing the same job. The pay discrepancy comes when you compare jobs in a area and women do the lower paying jobs while the men historically have taken the harder dirtier jobs. If you actually want to compare pay you MUST do it by job within the same company. Let's say a entry level coal miner makes 20.58 for a male and they pay a female 15.68 than that is pay discrimination. If all workers are hired in at the same pay then no problem. If you compare the coal worker to the secretary than there is a difference. Look at Hillary even her women were paid Less than male counter parts.
(7)
(0)
Sgt Jay Jones
PO1 Todd Walters. I do agree with you different job, different pay, same job, same pay. You don't see pay discrimination in the Military or the Federal Government, because the rules are spelled out in black and white. Private industry is another issue. There are well documented incidents of pay discrimination for doing the exact same job.
(2)
(0)
PO1 Todd Walters
Sgt jay Jones. Then they allowed it to happen. If they contracted at a certain pay and someone else comes in and negotiated a different pay then what is the problem.. It is the fault of the negotiator. Ceo's that complain they are paid differently than male counterparts only have their negotiating skills to blame.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
Sgt Jay Jones - I will offer my perspective from when I ran a temp to hire an permanent placement agency, which matches my wife's experience as the Director of HR, negotiating compensation packages with potential hires, once the management team decides who they want. For the most part, the hourly wage for hourly position was set and there was little or no flexibility.
For salaried professional positions I fully briefed candidates on my estimate of the total value of their potential compensation package should be worth for the metropolitan statistical area they would be working in.
I also offered:
_their predecessor's relevant employment history
_their predecessor's compensation package
_comparison of their skill set and their predecessor's skill set
_the range the company stated they felt they could offer a well-qualified candidate
_as much detail as possible on what competitive companies were offering
_my perception of the company's level of enthusiasm.
_concerns and reservations the company might have
_what was and was not negotiable.
_long range earning potential with the company.
I could not negotiate for the candidate, but I always debriefed them and the company officer they negotiated with. Here's what my experience was;
_The vast majority of men started negotiations with, and were almost exclusively concerned with salary
_A significant minority (25%-30%) of women started with negotiable, non-salary items
_Men generally started negotiating salary above the point I suggested, negotiated down and then leveraged their salary up again, by giving on flexible non-salary items. There is a range where this is a good idea, but negotiations broke off quickly if the starting point was unrealistic.
_Women generally started negotiating salary in the middle or slightly above the middle of the range I gave, or the point I thought they should get; whichever was lower. They rarely negotiated on negotiable non-salary items if they didn't start there. Women generally left a lot of money on the table. Generally 5%-15%.
_Both men and women tried to nail down the final offer at the first meeting, but the ones who walked away with the biggest compensation package typically had 1-3 follow on negotiations.
Hiring managers said in general, that women have lousy poker faces.
For salaried professional positions I fully briefed candidates on my estimate of the total value of their potential compensation package should be worth for the metropolitan statistical area they would be working in.
I also offered:
_their predecessor's relevant employment history
_their predecessor's compensation package
_comparison of their skill set and their predecessor's skill set
_the range the company stated they felt they could offer a well-qualified candidate
_as much detail as possible on what competitive companies were offering
_my perception of the company's level of enthusiasm.
_concerns and reservations the company might have
_what was and was not negotiable.
_long range earning potential with the company.
I could not negotiate for the candidate, but I always debriefed them and the company officer they negotiated with. Here's what my experience was;
_The vast majority of men started negotiations with, and were almost exclusively concerned with salary
_A significant minority (25%-30%) of women started with negotiable, non-salary items
_Men generally started negotiating salary above the point I suggested, negotiated down and then leveraged their salary up again, by giving on flexible non-salary items. There is a range where this is a good idea, but negotiations broke off quickly if the starting point was unrealistic.
_Women generally started negotiating salary in the middle or slightly above the middle of the range I gave, or the point I thought they should get; whichever was lower. They rarely negotiated on negotiable non-salary items if they didn't start there. Women generally left a lot of money on the table. Generally 5%-15%.
_Both men and women tried to nail down the final offer at the first meeting, but the ones who walked away with the biggest compensation package typically had 1-3 follow on negotiations.
Hiring managers said in general, that women have lousy poker faces.
(3)
(0)
PO1 Todd Walters
They compare outgoing ceo's pay to incoming or to other companies which may or may not be doing as well. Why would a company hire a person in at a higher level when a person negotiated a lower level.? The art of negotiating is slowly becoming non existent
(2)
(0)
6
6
0
"The Equal Pay Act of 1963 is a United States labor law amending the Fair Labor Standards Act, aimed at abolishing wage disparity based on sex. It was signed into law on June 10, 1963, by John F. Kennedy as part of his New Frontier Program. In passing the bill, Congress stated that sex discrimination depresses wages and living standards for employees necessary for their health and efficiency; prevents the maximum utilization of the available labor resources;
tends to cause labor disputes, thereby burdening, affecting, and obstructing commerce;
burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and constitutes an unfair method of competition."
So there's that little tid bit debunking any myth of a systemic gender pay gap...
Then there's life decisions.. men generally tend to work toward higher paying careers than women do. When women are choosing things like education, visual and performing arts, psychology, and English literature, and men are choosing things like Engineering and Computer Science, yes there is going to APPEAR to be a disparity if you just generalize things. If you break it down by career field and all of those finer details, it's going to be the same.
If you take Bill and Shirley who have both worked as cashiers at Retail Chain A for two years, they're going to be making the same amount of money.
tends to cause labor disputes, thereby burdening, affecting, and obstructing commerce;
burdens commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and constitutes an unfair method of competition."
So there's that little tid bit debunking any myth of a systemic gender pay gap...
Then there's life decisions.. men generally tend to work toward higher paying careers than women do. When women are choosing things like education, visual and performing arts, psychology, and English literature, and men are choosing things like Engineering and Computer Science, yes there is going to APPEAR to be a disparity if you just generalize things. If you break it down by career field and all of those finer details, it's going to be the same.
If you take Bill and Shirley who have both worked as cashiers at Retail Chain A for two years, they're going to be making the same amount of money.
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
Sorry but I hardly see an issue here. Obama's policy (not law by the way) would have required a business over 100 people to report the positions, pay, gender, race, and ethnicity of the individuals. First of all, the equal pay act already covers this (by law). The policy also does not account for so many other things like experience, longevity, education, performance, etc.
(5)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google