Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Stats The Almighty Buck

All Else Being Equal: Disputing Claims of a Gender Pay Gap In Tech 427

Posted by timothy
from the cash-on-the-table-or-not? dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Synthia Tan writes that when you investigate the actual data, controlling for non-gender factors (like number of hours worked) the gender pay gap seems to disappear. 'A longitudinal study of female engineers in the 1980s showed a wage penalty of essentially zero.' In some cases women make more than men: women who work between 30 and 39 hours a week make 111% of what their male counterparts make." The researchers were studying more recent data, too; what are things like on this front where you work?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

All Else Being Equal: Disputing Claims of a Gender Pay Gap In Tech

Comments Filter:
  • by Chrisq (894406) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @09:49AM (#46395669)
    I really have no idea what any of my colleagues earn (within salary bands), but I have no reason to think there is a difference. Certainly both make and female seem to be as happy with their packages.
    • by NotDrWho (3543773) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:11AM (#46395809)

      I may get accused of being a sexist and all for saying this, but it's been my experience that a feminist vision of "equality" is very different from my definition. "Equality" in their mind is getting all the perks of being a woman (men fawning over you and buying you free food and drinks, sexual power, the taboo on physically attacking you, etc.) while simultaneously also getting all the perks of being a man (higher breadwinner pay, political power, etc.)--and all without having to suffer ANY of the downsides of either gender.

      In short, they want it ALL, they want it NOW, and they want it all for FREE.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Why on Earth would anyone accuse you of being a sexist merely on the basis of your making sweeping generalizations about what you think an entire gender group means by "equality", based on your limited experience with a few members of that group? Ridiculous. Bloody feminazis demanding that individuals be treated as individuals. Don't they realize how much easier it is just to relax with a bunch of inaccurate preconceptions?

        • by cyborg_zx (893396) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:24AM (#46395913)

          it's been my experience that a feminist vision of "equality"

          Why on Earth would anyone accuse you of being a sexist merely on the basis of your making sweeping generalizations about what you think an entire gender group means by "equality", based on your limited experience with a few members of that group?

          Feminist = entire gender group?

          Bloody feminazis demanding that individuals be treated as individuals.

          Might want to actually try seeing what these people are saying because it's about as far from that as one can get.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          making sweeping generalizations

          So out of curiosity, how many women have you dated who wanted to go dutch on dates? Didn't expect you to buy them flowers or jewelry? Didn't want you to open doors for them? Didn't expect you to protect them in a fight?

          Be honest now, Mr. Inaccurate Preconceptions. Show us evil sexists that we're soooo wrong, with all your stories of the women you've known who *really* wanted to be treated equally.

          • by YttriumOxide (837412) <yttriumox@gma i l .com> on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @11:08AM (#46396349) Homepage Journal

            So out of curiosity, how many women have you dated who wanted to go dutch on dates? Didn't expect you to buy them flowers or jewelry? Didn't want you to open doors for them? Didn't expect you to protect them in a fight?

            Not the person you're replying to, but I felt I should step in here...

            My wife always paid her fair share when we dated. I honestly felt a little uncomfortable about it at first, but she insisted.

            She loves it when I buy her flowers and jewellery, but she'll buy me stuff I like too; so that seems even to me.

            I'll hold doors open for her, and she is happy that I do. But she'll hold doors open for me too, and I'm happy that she does.

            She most certainly would expect me to defend her in a fight; but equally, I'd expect her to defend me in one. (neither of us is particularly physically inclined, but we're also not really the types to get in to fights; so thus far it hasn't been a situation that has arisen)

            Basically my point is that just because a woman expects some things from the guy, it doesn't mean she's asking for unequal treatment... she may be willing to do all those same things too.

          • by jythie (914043)
            Actually, all of the women I have dated have been like that. For that matter most of the women I know are like that. The ones you describe are more creations of men in internet forums telling other men how women are.
            • by boristdog (133725) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @11:32AM (#46396577)

              Women will get men to do stupid things for them as long as there are men willing to do stupid things for them.

              Men will get women to do stupid things for them as long as there are women who will do stupid things for them.

              It's almost as if people will take advantage of other people if they allow them to do so.

              • by jythie (914043) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @11:46AM (#46396689)
                More accurately, there are men and women who will take advantage of others, but that does not mean 'men' or 'women' do. There will always be jerks, but jerks do not define the whole.
                • by jedidiah (1196)

                  There is still the social expectation that the man must make money but the woman is free to sit on her butt and atrophy. This disparity is rather widespread in those demographics where it's economically feasible.

                  These expectations (and other differences between the sexes in terms of social indoctrination) help feed into the labor statistics.

            • by ranton (36917)

              Actually, all of the women I have dated have been like that. For that matter most of the women I know are like that. The ones you describe are more creations of men in internet forums telling other men how women are.

              While anyone saying women never pay is being ridiculous, so is anyone saying most women pay their own way while dating. The first site that popped up in a Google search showed that 83% of women either don't offer to pay or only offer with the expectation that the offer will be turned down. Unless you are using a dating site while filtering on liberal women, or dating inside a small circle of friends with a very liberal mindset, it is unlikely that you are going to come across many women who are willing to a

      • by Mitchell314 (1576581) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:26AM (#46395921)

        In short, they want it ALL, they want it NOW, and they want it all for FREE.

        You're new to this planet. See, there's this thing called human nature . . .

      • by sandytaru (1158959) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:27AM (#46395937) Journal
        Not gonna say you're sexist, just that you hang out with bad women. What you've just described is the typical gal who hangs out in a bar waiting for Prince Charming to come along and pay her way through life. My sister was one such woman, and I viewed her as a negative role model. If a woman is hanging out in a bar trying to meet guys, it's because she's a boring person and doesn't have anything else better to do with her life. Women with actual hobbies and interests have no trouble finding men (which is why they're taken), and they tend to be nicer people overall.
      • by shadowrat (1069614) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:40AM (#46396049)

        I may get accused of being a sexist and all for saying this, but it's been my experience that a feminist vision of "equality" is very different from my definition. "Equality" in their mind is getting all the perks of being a woman (men fawning over you and buying you free food and drinks, sexual power, the taboo on physically attacking you, etc.) while simultaneously also getting all the perks of being a man (higher breadwinner pay, political power, etc.)--and all without having to suffer ANY of the downsides of either gender.

        In short, they want it ALL, they want it NOW, and they want it all for FREE.

        well, speaking as a man, i also want to get paid as much money as i can, be fawned over, and get free food all while not being physically attacked.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by QilessQi (2044624)

        I know a lot of women who have self-identified as feminists for years, and not a single one of them fits the description you have. All the feminists I know are hard-working professional women, hard-working homemakers, or both. That includes some of my peers and managers in the tech field, by the way. Maybe you've just been spending time with some unusually selfish women -- it's possible; there are jerks of both genders out there. I suggest finding a different peer group, because your current one seems t

        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward

          there's no "taboo" against people physically attacking a woman

          What color is the sky in your world?

      • by jythie (914043)
        I don't know... I have generally found that women like that exist mostly in the imaginations of men trying to explain why they are not sexist.
      • by OakDragon (885217)
        The way you put things, yeah that might be interpreted as sexist...

        Honestly (and this is just my opinion), I don't think women want to look at it as "effort/time put in = money". They see the position, it is basically the same "tier" for a man and a woman, and the woman makes less. Never mind that particular man may have worked X more years and puts in Y extra hours.
      • by freak0fnature (1838248) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @11:31AM (#46396561)
        My ex wanted me to be prince charming, yet claimed I was too insensitive when she started talking to me with disrespect or accusing me of being incompetent or not smart enough to "properly" shingle a roof. She expected me to help out or do most of the "traditional female chores", and do all the "man chores", while we both worked full time and had a child. Not to mention she expected me to be happy in a relationship where she didn't put out, and spent far more than we could afford. She was a well educated, intelligent, good looking, had hobbies and interests, modern woman. We are both 130+ IQs, she had 2 bachelors and I had 1 (though I make 2x what she made). She left looking for something better and has spent the past 5 years saying how there are no good men out there. Even had the balls to say that to my parents. All of her friends are the same way. They take their children with them and expect as much money as they can squeeze out of their ex's. That is the modern view of "equality". Meanwhile I remarried the most opposite person I could find...someone who enjoys taking on traditional female rolls, enjoys being a wife, enjoys taking care of a man, is not lazy in the least bit (though is also educated, has a bachelors in biochem and speaks 3 languages fluently). The budget is balanced even with my ex getting child support and my wife isn't working. I know this relationship will last, because she is not a feminist.
      • by Nemesisghost (1720424) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @12:01PM (#46396879)
        It's not just feminist who are this way, but all special interest groups. Everybody claims they want equal treatment, but in reality what they want is preferential treatment. And the ones who get screwed over are those who belong to the formerly dominate class, but never leveraged this dominance for themselves, who now find themselves at a disadvantage because of the "equalization" that has taken place. As a straight white male in the United States, I can't compete equally with my minority peers, I have to be better than them. Otherwise, with all other quantifiable characteristics being equal, they will get the jobs & services I want.
  • by ranton (36917) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @09:51AM (#46395683)

    I haven't even heard of a study that says there is a significant wage gap for at least a decade. When accounting for career, hours worked, experience, etc. the worst I have heard is a 3% wage gap. When you factor in that women are known to negotiate less for salary the gap probably disappears completely.

    The focus now needs to be on why women don't enter as many high paying fields (and whether that is even a problem at all). Focusing on the wage gap is pretty silly now.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:00AM (#46395751)

      The focus now needs to be on why women don't enter as many high paying fields (and whether that is even a problem at all).

      I think a big part of it is that those jobs tend to come with a shitty work/life balance and cultures that encourage crazy hours (especially in engineering type positions). Women tend to be more into the work/life balance and tend to have more time obligations outside of work (kids being the big one).

      The only other argument that makes any sense to me is established culture, which kinda ties into that. An office full of mostly guys is going to have a very guy culture, same as an office full of women is going to have a women culture. All the little silly office stuff on it's own probably doesn't matter, but collectively I could see it making a job unappealing. I have a hard time listening to a female coworker talk about her kids for like a half hour at lunch.. an office filled with women who do this constantly would probably drive me insane, so I can see the reverse being true.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cryptizard (2629853)
        Kids are only a bigger obligation for women because society expects them to do the majority of care and household work, even when they have full time jobs. If that weren't true, then you would see dads having the same problem and working less hours.
    • by Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:21AM (#46395885)

      There's quite a lot of dispute that there was ever a gender based wage gap. Reading Dorothy Dix from the 20s and 30s, she seemed to think that men and women were compensated equivalently at that time, and earlier. Which if you think about it makes sense, if a company could hire one gender for less, why wouldn't they hire that gender exclusively?

      Given that, why is the POTUS parroting these myths? Is he planning to mandate higher wages for women and quotas when employers are unwilling to hire these more expensive employees or what?

      • by Attila Dimedici (1036002) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:48AM (#46396129)
        The most amusing thing about President Obama going on about gender pay inequality is that one of the few places where it is significant is one of the places where he has the most control over it, White House staff. There have been several reports that women who work at the White House are paid significantly less than men working at the White House, even when they are filling the same role.
        • by geekoid (135745)

          Oh, reports you say? well then, I guess that clinches it.

          Salaries our paid be the government, not whom ever happens to be in the white house.
          Not that those numbers are really believable:
          http://www.whitehouse.gov/file... [whitehouse.gov]

          If you will note, there are more women at the entry level position.

          The president has no control over their salaries.

          What this shows is the Obama is doing a pretty good job as president. All number show improvement, so no one can attack him with actual job performance facts. SO Fox et. al. Att

      • by TheLink (130905)

        There's definitely a pay gap for pro tennis. Women who can't beat male tennis players ranked around #100 earn far more than the male players.

        But more people will pay more to watch the women play than the rank 100 male tennis players play. Sexism? Gender inequality? Certainly. But vive la difference! :)

        I think women ten-pin bowlers are as good as the guys though, some maybe even better...

      • Given that, why is the POTUS parroting these myths? Is he planning to mandate higher wages for women and quotas when employers are unwilling to hire these more expensive employees or what?

        No, it's pure politics. He's part of the Dem team, and they are currently having a lot of successes using social issues to divide the electorate. As long as they can keep the people thinking the other team is conducting a "war on women" and would support policies to oppress the female gender, they can get people to vote for them. Just because he doesn't have another election, doesn't mean he can't see the benefits in having more of his own "team members" in congress.

    • by Xest (935314) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @12:24PM (#46397131)

      "I haven't even heard of a study that says there is a significant wage gap for at least a decade. When accounting for career, hours worked, experience, etc. the worst I have heard is a 3% wage gap."

      Hours worked is where I've seen the numbers most distorted. Most studies I've seen talking about pay gap don't account for hours and are based on the premise that most women in opposite sex relationships still opt to take on the role of picking up kids from school and such instead of their partner and so do less hours, but as this is omitted from the study the claim is made that they're paid less. Certainly in the UK few studies seem to take in hours worked, most just take the sex, the profession, and the annual salary and do nothing more than that.

      So the issue of disparity in most cases is that in most couples it's still the female that is taking on the role of housewife but this is entirely a choice between couples and not a workplace problem in the slightest beyond the fact that this also impacts womens career progression because statistically you're more likely to know the company better the more hours you spend there, and hence be a more suitable candidate for promotion, hence why women are less likely to be promoted - because they're also more likely to be less committed to work and more committed to home.

      The fact is some feminists want women to be able to take the housewife option, do less hours, AND still get paid as much as their male colleagues working longer hours and it's this that distorts the argument and makes the whole discussion nonsensical most of the time.

      I don't pretend sexism doesn't exist and isn't a problem, I've certainly witnessed women suffer sexism in the workplace and have called it out when I've seen it, though I've also witnessed women abuse their sexual attractiveness to gain promotion with stupid sexually desperate male bosses too so I'm not overly convinced those two things don't balance out and I believe both need to be eliminated as far as possible.

      The real key issue is getting a better balance between males and females that act as home makers vs. breadwinners if we want to see things balance out. Heeding calls for quotas based on statistically fraudulent studies that omit things that make it like for like such as hours worked though simply build resentment and have the opposite effect of making members of each sex view each other equally in the workplace.

  • I am not surprised (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dptalia (804960) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @09:52AM (#46395693) Homepage Journal
    I've been discriminated against because of both my gender and my religion, but I have NEVER been paid less than my male colleagues. I may not have had the opportunities to grow given to me, but I've always made good money. In my current job I'm one of the highest paid people on my contract. My personal experience is that there's no pay gap - do your job and get paid accordingly,.
    • My wife has experienced gender discrimination also. Most recently, our power company was coming by to do some work on a pole behind our house. They wanted to pull a giant truck up our neighbor's narrow driveway (right up against our house), onto our lawn, reach it over our garage, and do the work. When my wife voiced concerns about hitting the house with the truck, the guy actually said to her "So you're worried about your house because you're a woman?" Yet, when I expressed those same concerns a bit la

      • by Ol Olsoc (1175323) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:38AM (#46396023)

        When my wife voiced concerns about hitting the house with the truck, the guy actually said to her "So you're worried about your house because you're a woman?" Yet, when I expressed those same concerns a bit later, they treated me like an actual homeowner concerned about his house.

        1. That hardly makes any sense, but okay.

        2. Your wife and you have an extremely low bar for sexual discrimination.

        So by your rather sensitive standards, every time I hear "You're not a woman - you couldn't understand", or "Men are pigs", then would that not be discrimination? Or about some feminine hygiene product being superior because it was invented by a female doctor? All of that is just more ways of saying "men are inferior".

        We see this sort of thing all the time, but have been conditioned to the idea that only men are ever sexist.

      • by realsilly (186931)

        Point 1, while I agree does happen, more often than naught, doesn't quite fit the topic of discussion.
        Point 2, you have nothing to compare too.

        As a woman, I have seen my own fair share of discrimination, but I know it exists under the surface and I go out of my way to try to prove myself. The study in this article does show a trend of hiring and pay practices in particular fields to show little to no discrimination; however in other fields such as a stock broker, or other high-paying fields, women don't fa

  • All the same here (Score:5, Informative)

    by germansausage (682057) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @09:54AM (#46395705)
    I have 2 junior engineers and 2 engineers-in-training working for me. One of each sex (like Noah's Ark really) and men and women in each job class are paid the same. I have one senior guy who is paid more, but he has 25 years in the field and a lot more knowledge and skills.
    • So if aliens invaded and wanted to create a super race of engineers, you're in for a good time?
    • by aaarrrgggh (9205)

      New EITs for us are at the same rate, but we actually see women accelerate faster. Unfortunately, they seem to catch on to the whole live/work balance faster than men which makes retention harder and flattens wages. On a case-by-case basis, it comes down to work output.

      Right now though, we could pay a 40% premium for an exceptional female mechanical PE with 15-20 years of experience, but that is definately an outlier.

  • Misogyny (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Even if this is true, it will be labelled misogyny and never be accepted by rabid feminists.

  • When you control for species, there are no differences between humans and lizards.

    It's good that sexual discrimination legislation has (mostly) sorted out the problem of women not being paid the same for equal work. That doesn't change the fact that, on the whole, there's a salary gap. As the linked article points out, some big factors out of this are the fact that women tend to leave their jobs more early, to have more intermittent commitments to work. The article seems quite content to leave the imp
    • Much more relevant would be an examination of why women are more likely to have this lack of commitment, and whether e.g. bullying in the work place, or unfavourable maternity/paternity leave arrangements are contributing to this.

      That is a good point, but as usuall, the most likely but least obvious possibility is ignored: Sometimes called work/life-balance, but maybe women just don't see a point in taking part in that life-long pissing contest that "career" in our corporate world became? If that guy next to you does 10 hours of unpaid overtime to impress his manager, you're doing 12, right? The people deciding about promotions like that kind of commitment. And so on.

      • What you're not considering though is that, in order for that guy to be able to do 10 hours of unpaid overtime, he has to have a wife at home willing to do all the child care and house work, even if she also has a full time job. It is societally expected that women will do that for a husband, so they are able to do crazy things like that. Of course, he might not have a family, but that situation is not in the majority. Most men have families and their wife picks up the slack at home.
        • I was considering that, but tried to focus on another question: WHY do that 10hours overtime at all?

          Perhaps there is a "female" solution like: "I'm making enough for me and my family, I'd rather spend those 10 hours with them and leave that rat race to those guys who seem to enjoy it." Sometimes the only way to win a pissing contest is not to play. (And if you're honest, thermonuclear war is only a very violent form of a pissing contest. But that's another movie)

          • I agree 100%. I don't think the solution is to make women work more horrible jobs, but increase the quality of life for everyone by refusing to be exploited. One thing that people don't think about is that increasing the number of women in a particular field forces management to change their policies in ways that help everyone.
            • I agree 100%. I don't think the solution is to make women work more horrible jobs, but increase the quality of life for everyone by refusing to be exploited.

              Oh yes.. nice idea. The problem is, that this goes against the average male ego. For some reason, competition is a defining male quality. (probably due to all the reproduction stuff, but why doesn't matter here)

              Who can run faster, who can drink more, who can bang his head harder against a stone wall. And of course who can lift more weight, who can carry more meat from A to B. That is already a "who can work harder". Society only rewards this with "Who can make more money", so it can exploit that trait. And

    • by pla (258480)
      That doesn't change the fact that, on the whole, there's a salary gap. As the linked article points out, some big factors out of this are the fact that women tend to leave their jobs more early, to have more intermittent commitments to work. The article seems quite content to leave the implication that, basically, this means that it's all the fault of women for just not caring about their career enough.

      "Fault"? No. Relevant to someone's experience level and corresponding pay? Absolutely.

      If a woman p
    • by aaarrrgggh (9205)

      It isn't legislation or litigation that changed things, it is the fundamental workforce demographics. For most families, being a "stay at home mom" isn't an option. Early legislation may have ensured that hostile workplace factors were taken out of the equation, which would have made a meaningful difference, but the balance is largely time.

      As for the resulting pay gap factors, it is pretty hard for anyone who works from 22-30, takes 6 years off, works again from 36-48 half time, and then works full time f

    • by godrik (1287354)

      Well, I think the study is still interesting. Because we still often hear that women are paid less for the same job. That study essentially proves it wrong. Before you can fix a problem, you first need to understand where it comes from. From this study, the problem does not come from discrimination in the hiring process. And this is good news.

  • Of course anyone who has looked into the actual data has already discovered the amazing level of lies directed at the male in our society - and keeping him 2nd class. Just ask yourself - just how hard and how long did you have to work to earn your shot at reproduction.. and your sister? Did she just have to find some guy to enslave (18-24 years) .. that's the level or parity we have. Open eyes please.

    Men 'earn' more. Normalized. The gap is life choice, not gender.

    Actual decent information may be found at ww

    • *Sigh* This is what happens when you spend to much time living in a basement. Fermenting those sour grapes.
  • by sdinfoserv (1793266) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:05AM (#46395779) Homepage
    As a manger in the tech field, I state for the record there is no pay gap. Starting pay is based on someone’s ability to negotiate and raises are based on skill. As far as a pay difference over all, a recent study says the entire pay gap is easily explained by choices of work. Women historically have selected employment that pays less. Teachers make less than engineers. The percentage of women in the teaching field is higher as is the percentage of men in the engineering field. Thus, if averaged just men vs women, men on average make more (in that example). However drawing that as a conclusion is erroneous, so people just need to get over themselves and do their best.
  • If I could hire females with the same qualifications, same productivity, and willing to work the same hours why would I hire a male if I could pay females 75%? We could cut payroll by 25% by just hiring women. I believe that misogyny exists, but i doubt it would be enough to increase payroll by 25%. Even the most misogynistic business owner would hire just females to save on costs. Since this isn't the case, we know women are not being paid less than their male counterparts generally.
  • Controlling for... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sockatume (732728) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:18AM (#46395863)

    I was under the impression that one of the issue was that women are less likely to get offered exciting projects, overtime, etc. etc. so they wind up stuck in relatively junior positions doing limited hours.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      They get offered all that at first but company stops asking after constant rejections. Young women, at least from my personal experience, are more focused on things outside of their career. There were several female co-workers who were more talented than me but unlike them I was willing to put in more hours to deal with problems at work. Last I heard one of them now runs a Yoga studio and another went back to school for PhD.

    • by Xest (935314)

      But it's a chicken and egg scenario isn't it? are women doing limited hours because they're not getting offered exciting projects, or are they not getting offered exciting projects because they're doing limited hours as they've made a choice with their partner to be the one that goes home early to collect the kids from school?

      I suspect you're right, but the underlying cause of that discrepancy is still not so clear cut.

  • Forbes and WSJ pointed this out a couple of years ago:

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/re... [forbes.com]

    If you actually look at how much work is done and actual years worked (not just age) etc. the gap disappears. Actually, according to the summary here there *is* a gap as women get paid more. I'm sure the feminists and looney lefters will want to fix this new problem. Not.

    • The problem is that you are controlling for things that actually do matter. Why are women less likely to work long hours? Because if you have a family, it is societally expected that the wife will pick up the slack in order for the husband to work longer. Look at any "high powered" man with a family and you will find that situation. Even if the wife has a full time job, she still has to do the majority of the work at home. It is not acceptable for a woman to work more and a husband to do the house work
      • Re:this isn't new (Score:5, Interesting)

        by sribe (304414) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:48AM (#46396131)

        Even if the wife has a full time job, she still has to do the majority of the work at home.

        Says who?

        I remember when I first read about these issues, 30 years ago, one of the surveys claiming that women did the majority of work at home, counted exterior house maintenance, yard maintenance, and car maintenance as mens' hobbies instead of work at thome.

        • Says the pigeonhole principle. If the man is working 80 hours weeks he doesn't physically have time to do the work at home. Those situations are common for men, but women cannot afford to do overtime because they don't have a safety net to take care of the work at home.
          • If the man is working 80 hours weeks he doesn't physically have time to do the work at home. Those situations are common for men

            That situation isn't common for men.

      • Let's pretend that's true. Let's pretend most families are like that. They aren't, but let's pretend you're right.

        Bob works for me, and he puts in 60 hours / week when needed, 50 hours average. His wife, Sally, works for a competing company, you. She leaves at 3:00 to pick up the kid from school. Are you going to pay Sally as much as I pay Bob, because she has a good excuse? As your competition, I sure hope so because you'll go broke that way. Bob, working those long hours, produces twice as much.

        You kno

  • I would hate to be judged on my hours worked. Sometimes I am less efficient than others and have to work more hours, sometimes I am more efficient and have to work less. I have generally been salary, generally been expected to work enough to get my work done, and generally been paid for the getting work done. Now, if I were a paper pusher then the hours worked would be a good metric. If I were a check out person at walmart then the hours worked would be a good metric. But hours worked has never seemed
  • by sandbagger (654585) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @10:30AM (#46395957)

    You're gonna be in trouble. I'm telling.

  • She hates to be reminded of the fact that she can't be working more then 6 hours a day. Yet she has a way of making sure that all my surplus hours are carefully filled in with me doing extra tasks like grocery shopping, going to the doctor with the kids etc... She get's to appreciate both sides of the spectrum all in her advantage.
  • I guess the race to pay everyone as little as possible has leveled the pay out!
  • Missed a few things. (Score:4, Informative)

    by jythie (914043) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @11:24AM (#46396505)
    I applaud the author for trying to keep things even and dig into the numbers, but she missed two rather critical things.

    The first thing she touched on was women staying in STEM. She dismisses this as personal choice and finding something 'more fulfilling', but most women I have talked to that dropped out of STEM did so more because of problems they encountered with coworkers and managers. They did not really want to leave the industry in order to take a lower paying job in another field, but they found treatment to be pretty bad and opportunities to be fairly restricted.

    And that brings us to the second point, opportunities. While it is true that actual pay for the same job tends to be fairly even, advancement opportunities for women still tend to be pretty limited. The same quality of work is often praised more for a male then a female and men are generally seen more as 'management material' and 'leaders', while the same leadership behaviors in women are often dismissed as being 'bitchy'. Dominance is often rewarded in men and punished for women, which results in fewer women getting those higher paying jobs within the same organization.
    • by phantomfive (622387) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @12:06PM (#46396943) Journal
      Those are interesting hypotheses, but as you mention, the evidence in the article directly contradicts your first point. It would be interesting if you found a study or something better than your friends to support that point.

      And let's be honest, who hasn't had lousy bosses and annoying coworkers? Those are reasons to find another company, not to change careers.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by GoCrazy (1608235)
      If we're going to go off anecdotal evidence, most of the women I've met who no longer do engineering have done so for personal (raising a family), career (joined politics) or academic (pursued PhD in Physics instead) reasons. You leave a job because of coworkers. You leave a career due to personal choice.

      As for the rest of your post, I refer you to the last line of the article:

      this perception is just one more factor discouraging women from entering the tech space.

    • by DaveV1.0 (203135) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @02:19PM (#46398681) Journal

      but most women I have talked to that dropped out of STEM did so more because of problems they encountered with coworkers and managers.

      Most of the men I know that have dropped out of STEM did so because of problems they encountered with coworkers and managers through out their careers. They got tired of the crap, but the stuck it out for a long time. From what you are saying, women don't stick it out as long. BTW, you don't mention what the problems were. Was it because the manager wanted her to work 60+ hours per week? Was it because she was expected to be available on vacation? Was it because she was expected to be on-call? Was it because the co-workers got tired of swapping shifts, on-calls, etc?

      The same quality of work is often praised more for a male then a female

      Really? do you have any evidence to back this up? Or, is it that you considered your work to be the same quality as your male counterparts and your boss didn't?

      Your post is just you grasping at straws to justify your preconceived bias.

  • by More Trouble (211162) on Tuesday March 04, 2014 @02:43PM (#46399063)

    Also? Cynthia Than's headline is the opposite of the conclusion in the research results [aauw.org]. A more serious treatment of the structural problems [chronicle.com] that lead to these gaps.

In a consumer society there are inevitably two kinds of slaves: the prisoners of addiction and the prisoners of envy.

Working...