03/11/2013
During a presidential debate Governor Romney used the
phrase, “binders full of women,” when he was referring to the resumes of
potential candidates for his Massachusetts cabinet.
The discussion was initiated by an audience member’s
question to the candidate for his thoughts on solving the wage disparity for
women. The former governor’s response
was that he made an effort to look for women to fill positions of influence at
the state level.
With women now making up over half of the workforce, it
would seem logical that more women would be progressing toward leadership roles
and the accompanying higher incomes.
According to Kiplinger,
women hold 52 percent of managerial and professional jobs (doubled since
1980). Yet, despite these gains, women
still earn 77 percent of what men receive.
There are numerous reasons for this disparity, but the
statistic itself could be the most distorted part of the equation. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a former U.S.
Department of Labor chief economist and senior fellow at the Hudson Institute
believes the figure is misleading, “These wage rations are calculated from
government data and do not take into account differences in education, job
title and responsibility, regional labor markets, work experience, occupation,
and time in the workforce.”
Instead of just comparing females versus males, there are
other factors that should be considered instead of passing laws based on gender
discrimination.
A report by the Federal
Reserve of St. Louis last year suggests two reasons why women earn less
than men. First, women are more likely
to work fewer hours than men and the authors recommend a comparison based on
hourly pay as opposed to weekly or annual salaries. Women often reduce their workweek to
accommodate family responsibilities and subsequently forgo overtime
opportunities as well. These both result
in a reduction of overall income for women.
Secondly, women are more likely to leave their careers to
take a break after childbirth and often to stay home with an infant or
preschool child. Disruptions in employment often mean delays in training and a
lower potential for promotion, both essential for career and salary
advancement.
The authors also site research that suggests women have a
“weaker labor force attachment than men,” and the result is often a career
choice with a shorter on the job training and a lower cost associated with
turnover. This places an, “implied lower
value,” on women’s work experience.
Sheryl Sandberg, current COO of Facebook urges women to
become better negotiators to secure higher salaries. Only seven percent of women negotiate their
first salary compared to 57 percent of men, Sandberg claims. When moving to a more lucrative position,
women are often starting from a lower income level than their male
counterparts. As their careers progress
and women earn more, they are already at a disadvantage from the start.
One possible solution is offered in the “Salary
Disclosure to Promote Equality Act.”
This is a petition for a government act that would require the posting
of a pay range for public and private sector jobs and disallow a requirement
for applicants to share salary history.
The initiative, by Katie Donovan, a salary coach, would ensure that a
company would not know what a candidate is currently making and could not lower
the offer based on that information.
Another solution women could consider when making career
choices is to choose an occupation that is typically dominated by men. The U.S. Department of Labor defines a
non-traditional job for women as one in which less than 25 percent of those
employed are women. Women who are
employed in non-traditional jobs earn higher wages than women in traditionally
female occupations. Jobs in “truck transportation,” are considered as “non
traditional” jobs for women.
We all make choices regarding our careers and those choices
lead us toward different salary levels and advancement opportunities. If we continue to point to the overall wage
disparity and blame it on gender discrimination, those
binders of women won’t create change.
When House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi pushed for the
passage of the Fair Pay Act because, she claimed, women earn 23 percent less
than men, a reporter challenged her. The
Daily Caller journalist found that women in Ms. Pelosi’s own staff earned an
average of 27 percent lower incomes than their male coworkers. His point?
Statistics can be misleading – and debated.
A report
in USA Today cited a survey of
400 economists conducted by the American Economics Association to explore
gender discrimination in their field. They found that 76 percent of women felt
that opportunities in economics favor men.
Eighty percent of men said women are being favored or the process is
neutral.
The debate surrounding gender based salary discrimination and advancement opportunities continues to divert our attention and our energy away from issues that can be solved without blaming others (men) for the problem.
