The debate "Nowadays there isn't a wage gap" was started by
December 3, 2018, 3:03 am.
22 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 25 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Stuart posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
TheExistentialist posted 3 arguments, Brynn posted 2 arguments to the disagreers part.
Stuart, Coriander, JDAWG9693, TJ, TD and 17 visitors agree.
TheExistentialist, A_communist94, Brynn, tenyiyi, goodlo, Hardikgreat, WiseWords, politicsislife, Argument_fightme and 16 visitors disagree.
Because it's illegal.....you can't discriminate on the basis of sex, that would be against the 14th amendment. How do you not know this?
Lol because he said it's an average byniched. Read his argument
Then why they not only contract woman?
I'm a bit confused by this statement. Are you wanting a survey conducted hourly or a survey that calculates difference in hourly wage rather than yearly salary?
If you mean the first, then I'd say that's an unrealistic expectation.
If you mean the latter, then I'd say it's irrelevant. Since you can express the wage gap as a percentage, you can simply do the math for hourly wages.
So if a male earns 20/hour, (in a field dominated by women; the fields dominated by men have a much higher pay gap, so I provided the most conservative data point), on average, a female employee with the same education, experience, etc... will earn only $14.22/hour.
There absolutely is a gender wage gap. The debate is whether or not that's caused by systemic sexism, societal sexism, or just what happens to be where women decide to work
But there is?
I can understand how data like that can occur when you take yearly samples but that is still quite a large time frame, my question is would they results still be present if done by an hourly basis?
Data shows that for "uncontrolled Gender wage gap" women earn 78c per 1 dollar men earn.
Even in "controlled" wage gap analysis you see a difference.
"Controlled" refers to the same job, same experience, same education, etc... "uncontrolled" refers to the population as a whole.
Now; the argument against using "uncontrolled" figures to look at wage gap is that it doesn't account for certain social and biological truths (pregnancy, willingness to work overtime, willingness to accept "dangerous" jobs, etc..). For this reason; let's look at a couple of high paying careers where we can compare apples to apples.
Let's look at healthcare first:
The 2018 Salary Survey (clinical advisor) reveals that female Nurse Practitioners (NP) and Physician Assistants (PA) make less than 87 cents for every dollar their male counterparts make. In both specialties, women earn more than $17,000 less per year than men.
2017, a study published in the Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners discovered that female NPs earn $12,859 less annually than male NPs
2016 survey of 10,000 American tech employees found an overall gender wage disparity of 30% in Seattle and 20% in San Francisco. In Seattle, the report found, women working in tech make about $110,000, while men make $143,000.
Even if we look at meta data for more occupations and even if we look at occupations with a predominant female workforce we see a wage gap.
Earnings ratio in the 20 most common occupations for full-time working women. The three largest occupations—‘registered nurses,’ ‘elementary and middle school teachers,’ and ‘secretaries and administrative assistants’. The gender wage gap among the 20 most common occupations have a gender earnings ratio for full-time work of 71.1 percent (corresponding to a wage gap of 28.9 percent, which amounts to $497 dollars less per week for women than men)
So research shows that the gender wage gap even in a "controlled wage gap" analysis objectively exists.
what wage gap are you referring to? Gender? Age? Education? Race?