Romney on pay equality for Women

[-Demosthenes-]

So you're saying that there's positive racism?

 

Maybe, I don't know. Any judgement based on race is racism (obviously). Questions about which types racism are good or bad are subjective. The point is that American culture has a long history of racism and some want to fix it with a different flavor of racism. I'm not saying it is good or bad, merely observing it.

[ydoaPs]

Any judgement based on race is racism (obviously).

 

There's a distinction made in academia between "racialism" and "racism". Racialism is just categorizing humans into races, whereas racism is turning the categorization into a hierarchy of value. There can be racialist judgements that aren't racist.

[swansont]

Ah - but there are analogues in the arena of pay equality; if you have automatic increments for long service, which many (especially unskilled) position have, then if you make it a requirement that the service is unbroken (which was very common); men (who do not tend to take paternity leave) benefit massively against women who may well take a few breaks (often longer than statutory maternity leave) when they have children. The result is that the first 15 years of the woman's career tends to contribute less to long-service benefits than a man's first five years. Another example - if you have different laws and protections governing permanent part-time employment and permanent full-time employment (almost universally less protection and benefits for part-time employees); the upshot is that women, many of who are part-time and who are the majority of part-time employees are treated differently than men who tend to be the full-time employees. Same laws for everyone - but those laws have a non-deliberate (?) structural penalty to women workers

I don't think that's an analogue, though, if there is no inherent difference in ability. I think the inequality has a positive feedback which amplifies discrimination effects.

 

If the pay equality numbers don't take seniority into account then they aren't valid numbers. (Up to the point that that the discrepancy is a result of discrimination). IOW, it's OK that I make more than a woman who is newly-hired into an identical job description as mine, because I've been doing that job for 15 years. It's not OK if that's the case with equal time-in-service.

 

The subtlety comes in when the woman takes a time off, as in your example, in addition to maternity leave, and the reason she takes the time off is because her spouse makes more, as a result of pay discrimination. That's the amplifier — there wouldn't be the same effect if more men took the time off, but there's a pay-inequality-driven financial incentive not to. Or, that women have to accept part-time employment as a result of discrimination, and that leaves them with lower pay and seniority, so that the effect compounds itself over time.

[John Cuthber]

This

"then if you make it a requirement that the service is unbroken (which was very common)"

is an arbitrary decision that adversely affects women more than men. It's indirect sexual discrimination and it's probably illegal in the UK under the equality act(2010)

 

"if you have different laws and protections governing permanent part-time employment and permanent full-time employment (almost universally less protection and benefits for part-time employees); the upshot is that women, many of who are part-time and who are the majority of part-time employees are treated differently than men who tend to be the full-time employees. Same laws for everyone - but those laws have a non-deliberate (?) structural penalty to women workers "

So, it's time to change the law again.

[-Demosthenes-]

There's a distinction made in academia between "racialism" and "racism". Racialism is just categorizing humans into races, whereas racism is turning the categorization into a hierarchy of value. There can be racialist judgements that aren't racist.

 

That's interesting. Whatever academics want to call it -- it's judgment based on race. Some get discriminated against because of their race as they apply for a college. I'm not saying this is bad or good. I just want to call a spade a spade. Whatever discussion there is in the public about theses issues should be a lot more open and honest.