Gender pay gap

You're a scientist, yet the concept of "anecdotal fallacy" seems to be going right over your head?

""When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears. This was based on data for 8.7m employees worldwide, gathered by the international Head-Hunters Korn Ferry."

Reminder: pointing out that on average men are taller than women is not saying that no women are taller than men.

Point: pointing out that based on 8.7m employees the pay gap for the same jobs in the same company "almost disappears" is not saying that no/some women are not paid less than men for the same jobs in the same companys.

The majority data/outcome is more compelling than the minority of cases. Besides, there are legal avenues the minority of women affected by unequal pay for same jobs can pursue

fmsfms The raw data shows a disparity, different interpretations of that data attempt to explain that discrepancy. Those interpretations of said data are not the objective truth of the data. Such is often more complex than that. I’ve seen Jordon Peterson make that very case. The most you can do here is to offer additional insights and assert it’s not all based on sexism, and if you restricted yourself to making that claim I’d back you.

However you are arguing that sexism has absolutely nothing to do with the disparity. Which is as absurd as saying sexism is the only reason. Bowlofbabelfish not that my opinion matters but for what it’s worth it’s good work you are doing, I accept your experience and have respect for what you are doing to correct for it.

Sometimes these stories get sensationalised in the media which is really unhelpful and lead us down the garden path. Chris Pratt getting paid more than his female lead in the next Jurassic movie, yet he was paid less than Jessica Lawrence in Passengers as she was the bigger star.

However when it comes to sport and entertainment I don’t think the answer that on average male athletes and actor/ presenters are bigger draws actually stands up as that in and of itself reveals a culture wide bias against women and female achievements. To say nothing that as women age they are put out to pasture far earlier than men on average when it comes to jobs in the public eye.

I’m obviously not a feminist but shit like that would piss me off if the situation was reversed. Can you not find yourself in possession of a quantum of empathy to that fact?

I’m a scientist so I’m firmly in the evidence camp myself. I’ve seen this happen in multiple companies I’ve worked in so yes, I believe it’s an issue.

Why should a man performing worse, or with worse qualifications, references etc be paid more than a woman?

"I'm steered by evidence and facts, not what I want to believe, a difficult concept for most people here"

Could you be any more obtuse?

Because there are lots of legitimate reasons why someone doing the same job might be paid more than a colleague.

Oh yes there are. Differences in performance for example. Higher appraisal scores. Higher contract values brought in in the business development team for example. Or being hired at a higher rate due to higher qualifications/ experience/ performance in previous role.

Can you tell me why a man, performing worse across all objective, measurable scores, or a man with lower qualifications worse references, and lower performance in previous role should be paid more than a woman with higher qualifications/ refs/ performance? In a company with guidelines on pay vs performance?

Why should a man objectively performing worse on all scores be paid more than a woman?

Because there are lots of legitimate reasons why someone doing the same job might be paid more than a colleague.

And plenty which aren't so legitimate. It's amazing how fiercely men argue to excuse discrepancies in pay stats. This is one of the reasons there is a gender pay gap, because so many men aren't prepared to engage with it - particularly those who have some ability to help change it, because they are in roles where they have a say over payrises and bonuses.

And funnily enough here's a quote from Jameela Jamil on the BBC today:

""I feel very comfortable asking my co-stars what they earn," she said.

"There is a pay gap between Ted Danson and Kristen Bell - but he was in Cheers, he is a national treasure. It's not just about gender, that's about what you bring to the table." www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44084773

The other way of looking at it is that you're dismissing data collected on 8.7m employees in favour of your anecdotal experience:

The anecdotal fallacy is widely known, it's not my fault you aren't aware of the concept (despite me linking it last night)

"You used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.

It's often much easier for people to believe someone's testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more 'abstract' statistical reality.

Example: Jason said that that was all cool and everything, but his grandfather smoked, like, 30 cigarettes a day and lived until 97 - so don't believe everything you read about meta analyses of methodologically sound studies showing proven causal relationships."

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

"
I’m not entirely sure what Kate Moss’s contract has to do with my line of work, nor any of the other examples you give."

Because there are lots of legitimate reasons why someone doing the same job might be paid more than a colleague.

Man asks question - have you seen x happen?
Woman answers - yes I have seen x happen
Man dismisses woman’s answer as irrelevant. Gives many irrelevant examples.

I think what happens here is you carry on denying what I’ve told you I’ve seen until I capitulate or you feel you’ve won the argument, is that correct? My disagreement with you is some kind of direct offence to your Male rightness?

Almost is not total is it? The data you cite still shows a difference? Yes? Then some places are still paying men more than woman for the same job. I’ve seen men be paid more at several places ive worked. You asked if anyone had seen this. I answered yes.

I’m not entirely sure what Kate Moss’s contract has to do with my line of work, nor any of the other examples you give.

"Yes I’m also talking about equal pay for equal jobs.

And telling you that I’ve seen several situations and actually challenged them where a man and a woman have been hired at the same time with the man offered more than the woman"

As I said last night at 2045

"When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears"

www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/08/01/are-women-paid-less-than-men-for-the-same-work

This was based on "data for 8.7m employees worldwide", gathered by the international Head-Hunters Korn Ferry.

So data on 8.7m employees says the pay gap "almost disappears" at the same job.

But @bowelofbabelfish says differently because in his/her personal experience she alleges that some men she knew got paid more than women she knew for doing the same job.

What do you think is more compelling evidence?

What do you think most neutrals would be persuaded by?

Reminder:

Did Munroe Bergdorf get paid the same as Cheryl for their loreal campaign?

Can Munroe charge/ask more for her time now she has a bigger profile

Is it fair that the Victoria's Secret Angels get paid more for their annual show than the non angels?

If Jane sells 10 TVs a week at Currys, is never late and Bob only sells 5 TVs and is hungover every Sunday then is Jane entitled to ask for a raise at the end of the year?

What about if Bob sorts his performance out and does just as well as Jane, then Jane gets an offer of a 20% pay rise to go work for a competitor. Are Currys entitled to match that offer and put Jane further ahead if Bob for doing the same job?

Kate Moss said she didn't get out of bed for less than £10k. Could those companies that hired her of got someone for cheaper/less to do the same job? But they wanted Kate Moss - why?

e.g. Higher performance, ability output etc

In all the cases I’ve challenged the woman was the higher performer - that was what allowed me to be confident of challenge and success. You need concrete metrics to be able to make a challenge of this kind.

Yes I’m also talking about equal pay for equal jobs.

And telling you that I’ve seen several situations and actually challenged them where a man and a woman have been hired at the same time with the man offered more than the woman. Despite the woman holding a PhD and the man not, despite far better references for the women and despite experience levels and previous performance levels being higher for the woman. And retrospectively the woman outperforming the man to the tune of tens of millions of dollars of contracts brought in in one case.

I’ve also seen men with lower performance scores give higher bonuses and increments than women. Same job, similar qualifications, similar experience levels: men actively performing worse but rewarded more. Justification ‘he has a family.’ So did the woman and both their spouses worked too.

It happens. It’s not the sole driver of the gender pay gap - that’s been discussed at length previously. But it happens. I’ve seen in happen pencils has worked across industries where it happens. I can only tell you what I’ve experienced directly which is that in organisations with no public pay spine structure, predominantly private ones, same job, same level, different pay occurs.

I’ve worked in several different countries. The only one I’ve seen it at a very low frequency was a Scandinavian country. The UK was / is quite bad for it.

Why do you think so many private companies have rules on not discussing salaries?

We currently talking about equal pay for equal jobs, not the pay gap

Please don't tell me I need to explain the difference?

"Are we lying?"

Anecdotal experiences are not compelling evidence, it's a logical fallacy

And as I'm trying to get through to you there are lots of legitimate reasons why people men or women get paid more for doing the same jobs, e.g. Higher performance, ability output etc

Funny how nobody can ever acknowledge that or respond to the examples.

Because the data (already linked) says the pay gap almost disappears in like for like jobs

Almost? Not totally? You would expect people in like jobs to be paid ballpark salaries. If the men are getting 12% that’s not an issue, because it’s a smaller component?

And yet it’s happened to me, others have said it’s happened to them and someone who works in the field has told you it’s fairly widespread? Are we lying?

There are multiple causes to the pay gap. Structural inequalities, such as women tending to drop out before higher levels (due to societal pressures) for example. Maternity leaves, etc etc. These are all causes. The like for like men paid more is a cause too. At the higher levels NDAs are very common. Even at my level - I’ve signed several over the course of my career.

Together, all these causes add up to form the concept of the sex pay gap. I thought that was fairly well established? It’s a complex issue with multiple causes. You seem very resistant to the idea that one cause is like for like discrepancy - why?

I'm steered by evidence and facts, not what I want to believe, a difficult concept for most people here

Back to the BBC, does Matt LeBlanc get paid more for Top Gear than his male co hosts? I wonder why that is

"May I ask why you keep dismissing the idea that yes, in some places men are paid more than women?"

Because the data (already linked) says the pay gap almost disappears in like for like jobs

@bowlofbabelfish

The BBC pay gap is the biggest load of nonsense ever (and I actually already brought that up)

Here's what I said "If David Attenborough feels too old to narrate Blue Planet 3 and the BBC hire a young unknown male co narrator, should they get paid the same"

Attenborough is clearly who most people associate with the show, he's the name brand behind it

Go look back at the other examples

Did Munroe Bergdorf get paid the same as Cheryl for their loreal campaign?

Can Munroe charge/ask more for her time now she has a bigger profile

Is it fair that the Victoria's Secret Angels get paid more for their annual show than the non angels?

Going back to the BBC, Carrie Grace admitted that her stories from China make it on air less than those from the States. So the job of international editor might be the same title in different regions but clearly other regions/editors are more productive

Funny that, that a communist one party state with a different language, culture and no free press of less interesting to British audiences than the USA, lol

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to alter any revealing details or identifying information

An NDA is an NDA. Disclosure, in anyonymous setting is illegal. With details changed is illegal. If you change the details it’s no good to you anyway. I could tell you I was a high powered ostrich polisher and my colleague Bob was paid 12.7% more than me. I’d be making that up of course, because ... NDA.

I’ve seen it happen, it’s happened to me and it’s happened to colleagues. An actual pay expert working with FTSE100 companies is telling you it’s widespread.

May I ask why you keep dismissing the idea that yes, in some places men are paid more than women? It’s not the only reason for the pay gap but it’s naive in the extreme to say it doesn’t happen.

If you want named names go google. Several examples from the BBC this year, for example, over Wimbledon I think there was one. there will be tribunals ongoing and completed for many companies.

Of course it happens. You’re very naive if you think it doesn’t

I am not allowed to take the data off the company servers.

Yep, I've consulted for a a very big health and social care firm. The saddest thing is the Board had no idea about the tax credit system and housing at all, not he fist clue, had no idea the wages were subsided and any pay increase or increased hours got clawed back form income tax credits in arrears and could mess up housing. So increasing pay is just increasing the tax take, it goes straight back to the treasury.

The fault lies in the rates paid by LAs. They are not given enough money. I went to a government consultation to try to talk about it but the wealthy old man I spoke to couldn't keep his eyes open. They need to ring fence increased tax income from tax credit cuts on pay increases to recycle it back into social care pay. I banged on about it but it's hard to get people that live at such a different income level to listen.

I worked in care for a little while no secret was made that women were preferred employees and while the pay was shit for them mine was frequently illegal. They disputed mileage and hours worked so u was always short.

That's a nasty bit of bait lying there stinking up the place.

I'm sure you're intelligent enough to alter any revealing details or identifying information

Non Disclosure Agreements.

Can you share some of the examples of different pay for exactly the same job.