Eureka!

C

Cancel7

Banned
Well, as you know, being a doble digter, spinzer with a jr. college education, ain't easy. I know jack shit about the economy, though thanks to Top I have learned that hi-iq people buy low and sell hi.

So as I have ambled through life, unable to attract a man because I can't talk about the economy (always the first question a man will ask you, too), and unable to be a hi-iqer because of my laughable jr college education, I have been trying to figure out how I can better myself.

Well, stop drilling baby, I struck oil!

I'm going to become a miner! Oh yeah. And, I am totally voting for McCain because he, and I guess he learned this from being married to a heiress, knows that women dont need no stinkin equal pay laws! What they need is more education cause the reason they are earning less than men is because men are more educated. What's that you say? There are actually more women entering college every year than men, and have been for some time? Well, whatever! The point is, that we need to get ourselves edjumcated, and as McCain points out here, women traditionally have not been miners. Think of the opportunities!

"Republican Sen. John McCain, campaigning through poverty-stricken cities and towns, said Wednesday he opposes a Senate bill that seeks equal pay for women because it would lead to more lawsuits...

...McCain skipped the vote to campaign in New Orleans.

"I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems," the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system."

The bill sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination...

...McCain stated his opposition to the bill as he campaigned in rural eastern Kentucky, where poverty is worse among women than men. The Arizona senator said he was familiar with the disparity but that there are better ways to help women find better paying jobs.

"They need the education and training, particularly since more and more women are heads of their households, as much or more than anybody else," McCain said. "And it's hard for them to leave their families when they don't have somebody to take care of them.

"It's a vicious cycle that's affecting women, particularly in a part of the country like this, where mining is the mainstay; traditionally, women have not gone into that line of work, to say the least," he said..."

http://personals.salon.com/blog/1188/post_66249.html?dcb=personals.salon.com
 
You attract plenty, it's the extacting of their soul and discarding them that's a little scary!!! jk
 
i don't know Darla.. i have been a compensation analyst in the finance/securities industry and their is most definitely a difference depending on the womans situation.

Its true for woman that have families earlier in there career and center life around family. What happens without stereotyping but being honest is they tend to be last in the office and first to leave, have gaps in work, use most sick time, and deal with a lot of personal stuff on the phone.. YES they are managing there family and there is nothing wrong with that.

They get the smaller raises and don't get promoted.

HOWEVER What I have witnessed is that woman who wait a little longer to have there family or the woman who choose not have a family promote at a much faster rate then the typical male counterpart.

Woman in general I think are more dedicated then men.. When its to their family then they lack on the pay scale. When its to their jobs then they soar.
 
Chapdog said:
i don't know Darla.. i have been a compensation analyst in the finance/securities industry and there is most definitly a difference depending on the womans situation.

Its true tho for woman that have families earlier in there career and ceter life around family. What happens without stereotyping but being honest is they tend to be last in the office and first to leave, have gaps in work, use most sick time, and deal with a lot of personal stuff on the phone.. YES they are managing there family and there is nothing wrong with that.

They get the smaller raises and dont get promoted.

HOWEVER What I have witnessed is that woman who wait a little longer to have there family or the woman who choose not to promote at a much faster rate then the typical male counterpart.

Woman in general i think are more dedicated then men.. When its to there family then they lack on the pay scale. when its to there jobs then they soar.
Click to expand...


Yeah but when women are still earning less for the same jobs, with the same qualifications and educations, then there isn't any excuse.
 
Darla, I grew up in that country that McSame was speaking in. You would think it to be hell. the high point of shopping is a wal mart about 15 miles away I think. Unless they built one recently there.
The county pop is a bit over 12k and 36K teeth.
 
Darla said:
Yeah but when women are still earning less for the same jobs, with the same qualifications and educations, then there isn't any excuse.
Click to expand...

let me explain it leaving woman out of the subject for a moment.

I had 2 male technical analyst's that had a 10k difference in pay. Both had almost identical job experience, both had similar degrees from decent schools, both were around the same age, and frankly both had similar skill sets.

The guy making 10k more over the past few years had gotten bigger raises from his boss causing the gap. The other analyst found out about his pay and came complaining since he had the same boss and job.

fact of the matter is that the guy making less maxed his sick time, frequently would show up late or bail out early, and the guy making more money was the one at 630 that when the boss came looking for something was always there. of course he will get rewarded for that.

anyways the guy making less found a new job.
 
Chapdog said:
let me explain it leaving woman out of the subject for a moment.

I had 2 male technical analyst's that had a 10k difference in pay. Both had almost identical job experience, both had similar degrees from decent schools, both were around the same age, and frankly both had similar skill sets.

The guy making 10k more over the past few years had gotten bigger raises from his boss causing the gap. The other analyst found out about his pay and came complaining since he had the same boss and job.

fact of the matter is that the guy making less maxed his sick time, frequently would show up late or bail out early, and the guy making more money was the one at 630 that when the boss came looking for something was always there. of course he will get rewarded for that.

anyways the guy making less found a new job.
Click to expand...


So your theory is that women systemically make less than men because they call in sick more often?
 
you are right that its a problem if in general woman are making less then men if there is NO DIFFERENCE in them in regards to commitment to job.

I must admit however that we would totally underpay foreigners who in general worked harder then others simply because we could get away with it. we had an off shoring initiative with India and payed probably 1/3rd the salary for the same work.
 
Basically, McCain seems to be against discrimination against women but doesn't want women to have any redress when they are discriminated against. It's crap.

We had a discussion about the Supreme Court case that the bill was designed to overturn a while ago but I couldn't find it yesterday.
 
Darla said:
So your theory is that women systemically make less than men because they call in sick more often?
Click to expand...

i was just trying to explain how this can happen from what i have witnessed. Say the budget for merit increase is 4% in 2008. Sally and Bob both make 50k. in a unionised situation both would get a 2000k raise right?

but in corporate world it doesn't work that way. you are compensated on performance.

Marie the boss gets 4% of all her direct reports salary and is at liberty (to a certain extent) to distribute the funds as she sees fits.. so if Sally went that extra step or had perfect attendance and bob was sick alot or left at 5 all the time then she may split it 5% sally and 3% bob.
 
Chapdog said:
i was just trying to explain how this can happen from what i have witnessed. Say the budget for merit increase is 4% in 2008. Sally and Bob both make 50k. in a unionised situation both would get a 2000k raise right?

but in corporate world it doesn't work that way. you are compensated on performance.

Marie the boss gets 4% of all her direct reports salary and is at liberty (to a certain extent) to distribute the funds as she sees fits.. so if Sally went that extra step or had perfect attendance and bob was sick alot or left at 5 all the time then she may split it 5% sally and 3% bob.
Click to expand...


Chap - You are talking about reasons why an one employee may receive higher pay than another regardless of sex, not discrimination on the basis of sex. Taking the above situation, it doesn't matter if it were Bob and Amos or Bob and Sally or Sally and Sharon, the differential in pay is a result of attendance, not sex.

The case that gave rise to this piece of legislation involved a woman who was actually discriminated against on the basis of sex alone, not any other performance related metric.
 
Chapdog said:
i was just trying to explain how this can happen from what i have witnessed. Say the budget for merit increase is 4% in 2008. Sally and Bob both make 50k. in a unionised situation both would get a 2000k raise right?

but in corporate world it doesn't work that way. you are compensated on performance.

Marie the boss gets 4% of all her direct reports salary and is at liberty (to a certain extent) to distribute the funds as she sees fits.. so if Sally went that extra step or had perfect attendance and bob was sick alot or left at 5 all the time then she may split it 5% sally and 3% bob.
Click to expand...

Chap your entire theory rests on your belief that women are less productive, dedicated and hard-working than men are. It’s ludicrous.
 
Woman are more productive.
Look at March madness, men spend millions of hours on office pools.
NFL draft - ahh millions more hours on 3,000 different draft scenerios
Fantasy football and baseball you get the picture.
 
uscitizen said:
Darla, I grew up in that country that McSame was speaking in. You would think it to be hell. the high point of shopping is a wal mart about 15 miles away I think. Unless they built one recently there.
The county pop is a bit over 12k and 36K teeth.
Click to expand...


That made die a little inside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top