GOP to women - "Screw you"

[MMinNJ 0]

Not directly related to the links, but something to consider-The majority of my professional friends did some negotiating when they joined their company/group. The highest paid (for her field) is the most agressive woman I have ever met. The others got what they settled for. I am not trying to stereotype women, but many were much more timid when it came time to make demands. Now, they will pretty much always be paid less then many of their male associates, despite doing the same job.

[Thanatos340 1]

That is the Beauty of a Free Market Economy. No one has to accept any particular job. If some doesnt feel they are being given a Fair salary, Dont take the job.

This "Poor Me" syndrome that permeates this country is so sad. Each individual has the opportunity to accept or NOT accept a job based on what is being offered. If they don’t like what is being offered, DONT take the job or negotiate an offer that is acceptable. If they do accept the offer, Don’t whine about it later if everything was crystal clear up front.

We have choices in this country. Use them. Don’t like they way you are being treated by your employer?? Find another Job. Cant find another Job? MOVE or reconsider what is “Fair”.

More laws are not the answer to this problem, Teaching women to stand up and NOT accept lower pay for the same job is the solution.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

I agree, if I as an employer want to pay less for blacks, I should be allowed to. Damn blacks don't have a "right" to work for me. If they don't like the fact I want to pay them less, let them go work some where else.

We already have too many laws, shouldn't meddle in a free market economy.

(Plus, there are a ton of illegal mexicans willing to do the job for even less, so who are these blacks thinking they can get more money than a white guy)

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Teaching women to stand up and NOT accept lower pay for the same job is the solution.

Yeah.. that has worked really well for most women in this country

How many threads have there been even here on this board that use derogatory terms to describe those who do "stand up"

[Thanatos340 1]

Till we get around to teaching people to look out for themselves instead of counting on others to look for them, This IS what we get.

Each Individual DOES have a Choice.
Laws are easily circumvented by assigning the same Job different job titles. If we are going to solve this problem it has to start with teaching individual to NOT accept jobs that do not pay them the same as others doing the same work. The INDIVIDUALS are the key, not the Government with more useless, unenforceable laws that only serve to keep Lawyers busy and tie up the courts.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

That is a very nice hypothetical utopia, akin to communism. Works great on paper, but in practice it just plainly sucks.

You may find this hard to believe, but if you are a single mother with two children at home, you may not have the luxury of quitting your job, or not accepting employement when you do finally find a job.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

So a "real job" (TM) involves struggling to stay in the red according to you Republicans. No wonder we have so much DEBT in this country. Me, in my fake job, I prefer to stay in the black.

Unlikely.

Public universities run heavily in the red, relying on state subsidies (and a shitload of federal grants) to operate.

Private universities are no better - they rely on alumni donations and increasing tuition much faster than inflation to operate.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

That is a very nice hypothetical utopia, akin to communism. Works great on paper, but in practice it just plainly sucks.

You may find this hard to believe, but if you are a single mother with two children at home, you may not have the luxury of quitting your job, or not accepting employement when you do finally find a job.

So what alternative do you offer?

Mandating equal pay for unequal work doesn't work well either. That IS communism. Does work well either - there's no motivation to be a hero.

Hard negotiators that don't deliver the goods don't last - they're the first to be fired in downtimes as they're too expensive for what they contribute.

Easy or bad negotiatiors that do deliver the goods do fine at good companies that value talent. My current company is one such place. But at bad companies (Wellsfargo is one), the only way those people get their worth is to leave for another place. Unfair? Maybe, but at the next place you find how much better life can be than working for a shitty company.

The kind of work where you can afford to discriminate is really the sort of work that is getting sent to India these days.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Mandating equal pay for unequal work doesn't work well either.

Didn't think anybody was talking about that. I thought the issue was mandating equal pay for equal work.

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

You really must enjoy screwing words meanings and positions to make a thread with a title like this with the attachments you put forth. Or, you think everybody else is stupid or, you think your self the only one that understand what really is going on.

While I would not have chosen to phrase it the way [kallend] chose to, it does capture the underlying sentiment.

A couple weeks ago I spoke with one of Sen Saxby Chambliss’ (R-GA) staffers. He couldn’t address the merit issue – he struggled but acknowledged that he couldn’t explain how voting against the bringing the bill to the Senate floor for debate could be in line with the principle of meritocracy nor could he explain endorsement of the implicit acknowledgement of significant amounts of prior (& ongoing)discrimination (as I outlined in my response to [lawrocket] above). I never even received any response from Sen Isakson’s office (R-GA).

What do you think is really going on?

VR/Marg

This is hilarious Marge. What do you think!?

Did his eyes start revolving like fruit machine/one-armed bandit wheels? Did he start to sweat and mutter 'wibble..'?

Fantastic.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

I thought the issue was mandating equal pay for equal work.

Who gets to decide what "Equal Work" is?

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Do you think 180 days is really enough to discover that you have suffered illegal discrimination when you employer does not, and is under no obligation to, provide informtion about other employees' compensation and, in fact, takes steps to keep that information secret?

You read Ginsburg's dissent, I see. Good on you. In a sense, I agree with Ginsburg's notion about consistently ratified acts to take it out of the statute.

But I'll also go kallend your quote: "you have suffered illegal discrimination." It ain't illegal unless she files a claim. Therefore, she suffered no illegal discrimination. How about that? She merely alleged that she did.

My opinion - Another example of those laws that suck but, you gotta make choices. This was a case of statutory construction.

Quote

How would you like it as an attorney if your opponents did not have to provide any information during the discovery process, could block your access to information, and if they succeeded for 180 days you have to give up?

I'd love it! Why? Because that is 135 MORE days than I have to act on it! Under the discovery statutes in California there is a "45 day rule." This rule means that I must motion to compel further responses within 45 days of the answers being served. So, let's say that the other side provides only limited answers to my interrogatories and a lot of objections. I've got 45 days to make my motion, and I must meet and confer in the interim.

If they succeed for 45 days I have to give up. Man - I'd dig having 180 days. It'd be awesome.
Don't sit on rights.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Mandating equal pay for unequal work doesn't work well either.

Didn't think anybody was talking about that. I thought the issue was mandating equal pay for equal work.

There are few jobs out there where you can say two people are doing equal work. Hourly wage jobs are one - those are likely to have fixed rates based on tenure. Violations there are obvious, unlikely to be committed anymore. Sales is another, which is why the bulk of the pay is usually in the form of commissions.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

This is hilarious Marge.

Eh-hem ... no "e." Hard "g" sound, please. Thank you.

Quote

What do you think!?

That the Senate version of the bill (a version already passed in House last July), S. 1843: Fair Pay Restoration Act, should have been allowed to be brought to the floor for debate. It seems that a lot of reports have missed that this was a motion to allow debate. For those who imagine an infinite time period for redress of past wrongs, this would/could have been the opportunity to amend the resolution.

The Equal Pay Act of 1963, Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 already prohibits discrimination based on sex, race, age, or ethnicity. (Emphasis for the US citizens.) That’s not the issue.

The issue *is* a ‘loophole’ in the statute. The proposed legislation is to close that loophole.

This legislation represents what folks who complain about “judicial activism” cite as the preferred route: i.e., legislators correcting a wrong, an inadequacy, or a change over time in the original law (i.e., the Civil Rights Act of 1964).

As has been mentioned, this law is in response to a SCOTUS case that overturned lower court rulings that found that Goodyear Tire Co. acted unlawfully in its long-term discriminatory pay practices. A divided SCOTUS found that per the Civil Rights legislation workers must sue for pay discrimination within 180 days of the original pay-setting decision (i.e., after receiving the first pay check), no matter how long the unfair pay continues.

Quote

Did his eyes start revolving like fruit machine/one-armed bandit wheels? Did he start to sweat and mutter 'wibble..'?

No, altho' a very amusing image, my goal wasn't that effect. It wouldn't have served in useful purpose, imo. He's not a dumb guy by any means; he's just trying to represent the views of his boss. It's not his fault if I disagree with his boss' views; that is, however, one of the reasons I'm supporting his challenger, former State Rep Jim Martin, (who is a Vietnam veteran, whereas Sen Chambliss got multiple deferments) ... but enough local Georgia politics.

VR/Margaret

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

The issue *is* a ‘loophole’ in the statute. The proposed legislation is to close that loophole.

This legislation represents what folks who complain about “judicial activism” cite as the preferred route: i.e., legislators correcting a wrong, an inadequacy, or a change over time in the original law (i.e., the Civil Rights Act of 1964).

Indeed! It's a political question for politicians to solve. If they can't get it passed, there is a political answer to it.

This is an issue for politicans to solve.

I dont' believe that the Republicans were saying "Screw you" to women. Nor do I believe Dems wer saying, "Screw you" to businesses.

This is just a political issue, and in politics, making mountains out of molehills is the norm. Respectful discourse doesn't get votes.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[vortexring 0]

Margaret, my apologies. (It's a Merlot Rose that's at fault this time.)

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[kallend 2,184]

Quote

Quote

So a "real job" (TM) involves struggling to stay in the red according to you Republicans. No wonder we have so much DEBT in this country. Me, in my fake job, I prefer to stay in the black.

Unlikely.

Public universities run heavily in the red, relying on state subsidies (and a shitload of federal grants) to operate.

Private universities are no better - they rely on alumni donations and increasing tuition much faster than inflation to operate.

I run my life in the black - thank you.

BTW being "not for profit" does NOT mean that you try to stay in the red.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,184]

Quote

***

If they succeed for 45 days I have to give up. Man - I'd dig having 180 days. It'd be awesome.
Don't sit on rights.

At least you KNOW you have a motion to make. Unlike the woman in this case, from whom information that there was even a problem was concealed.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I run my life in the black - thank you.

BTW being "not for profit" does NOT mean that you try to stay in the red.

big deal - tenure makes it fucking easy. Bush could pull it off.

Few businesses have it as easy as the university, esp any established ones. The monkey that did movies with Reagan could maintain one.

[kallend 2,184]

Quote

Quote

I run my life in the black - thank you.

BTW being "not for profit" does NOT mean that you try to stay in the red.

big deal - tenure makes it fucking easy. Bush could pull it off.

Few businesses have it as easy as the university, esp any established ones. The monkey that did movies with Reagan could maintain one.

Apparently you don't have a clue. Most university presidents would love to eliminate tenure.

And getting back to the point, are you defending wage discrimination against women?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So a "real job" (TM) involves struggling to stay in the red according to you Republicans. No wonder we have so much DEBT in this country. Me, in my fake job, I prefer to stay in the black.

Unlikely.

Public universities run heavily in the red, relying on state subsidies (and a shitload of federal grants) to operate.

Private universities are no better - they rely on alumni donations and increasing tuition much faster than inflation to operate.

I run my life in the black - thank you.

BTW being "not for profit" does NOT mean that you try to stay in the red.

Professor - I made a mistake, okay. I said "red" instead of "black." Mistakes happen. I make them and if I do I try to fix them.

Jeez, people.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[skymiles 3]

Quote

Professor - I made a mistake, okay. I said "red" instead of "black." Mistakes happen. I make them and if I do I try to fix them.

Jeez, people.

Lawrocket, we all knew it was a mistake and what you really meant. Some people like to jump on honest mistakes or poor word choices. It makes me bitter.

Phil

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Who gets to decide what "Equal Work" is?

If there is a dispute, the courts.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Sales is another, which is why the bulk of the pay is usually in the form of commissions.

Which is fair. What wouldn't be fair is if the commission rate was different for blacks, or women, or men or whatever...I think you get my point.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Sales is another, which is why the bulk of the pay is usually in the form of commissions.

Which is fair. What wouldn't be fair is if the commission rate was different for blacks, or women, or men or whatever...I think you get my point.

The point there being made was outside of Sales, most white collar work is not easily quantified. The courts are not in a position to make a good judgement on it. It's very similar to the sort of testimony in the he said/she said consensual sex/data rape cases. Might as well just flip a coin.