According to the World Economic Forum, there is no country on earth where women make as much as men for the same work. In their 2016 Global Gender Gap Report, it is estimated that, at current rates, it would take another 170 years to close the global pay gap between men and women.

The pay data for Australia certainly isn’t bucking this trend. It doesn’t matter which way you look at it, there is consensus that the gender pay gap exists. Even though the overall gap in Australia has reduced slightly over the past two years, according to data from the ABS women still make 16.2% less than men.

Yet, somehow, talking about the pay gap can still be controversial.

Too often in my job, I am called on to counter arguments about the gender pay gap being a “myth”, or that “the gender pay gap figure isn’t real; it’s a manipulated, oversimplified figure that doesn’t represent real situations”.

Earlier this month the organisation I lead, Diversity Council Australia, released an important report together with KPMG and the Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA). Called She’s Price(d)less – the economics of the gender pay gap, it presents a picture of the economics underlying the gender pay gap.

We asked KPMG to decompose the factors that make up the pay gap so that we could understand exactly why it persists and what we can do about it .

The resulting report counters the myths and provides the evidence that refutes a whole range of other “reasons” put forward about women earning less because they “choose” to work part-time or take time out of the workforce to care for family members.

And my hope is that, with this evidence in hand, we can have a rational conversation based on data, sound research and with the facts in mind.

So here goes.

Women are paid less because they ‘choose’ to work part-time
Our report showed that there has been a significant decrease in the impact of part-time employment on the gender pay gap. It has actually declined from 14% to 4%, in part because of an increase in higher-paid part-time roles for women. This is good news as it means that much of the hard work that has been done on improving flexible work options is starting to pay off.

The idea of “choice” becomes questionable, however, when one considers that overwhelmingly it is still women who take on the bulk of unpaid caring roles within families. There are a number of reasons for this (historical and social norms playing a significant part) but, given that men are paid more than women, for many families it just does not make financial sense for men to work part-time as it will result in a bigger cut to the family budget.

Women are paid less because they ‘choose’ lower-paying jobs
Our report showed that industrial and occupational segregation continue to be significant contributing factors to the gender pay gap. But while occupational segregation is decreasing (i.e. the different types of roles men and women do), the impact of industrial segregation (i.e. the different industries that men and women work in like mining or healthcare) has increased.

Women are not “choosing” to work in lower paying industries but, when large numbers of women start to work in an industry, they all get paid less. As Rhaina Cohen explained in an article in the Atlantic:

A study [by the sociologists Asaf Levanon, Paula England, and Paul Allison], which examined census data from 1950 to 2000, found that, when women enter an occupation in large numbers, that job begins to pay less, even after controlling for a range of factors like skill, race and geography. Their analysis found evidence of “devaluation” – that a higher proportion of women in an occupation leads to lower pay because of the discounting of work performed by women.

So, in other words: 50 years of data proved that the more women join an industry the less everyone gets paid.

If that’s not convincing enough, Cohen also pointed to a study showing that higher the percentage of women in an industry the lower its perceived “prestige”; and a study from 2007 that found that even where men’s low-wage jobs demand far less in terms of skill, education and certifications than women’s low-wage jobs, the male-dominated ones usually command higher hourly pay.

Read, understood, agreed with and appreciated.

You know we will be called man haters now though, right?

I busted those myths decades ago...... basically it's all lies...

mothra wrote on Jul 20^th, 2017 at 7:06pm:


By the muppets on this forum? Its pretty difficult to be insulted by people who have consistently shown that they are nothing but wrong all the time.

I busted those myths decades ago...... basically it's all lies...

NOBODY on a wage or salary level is paid less than the required amount for that work - to do so WAS illegal (before Joey and Tones got their hands on it following in the footsteps of Wee Johnnie Howard)

The pay gap figure is bogus because it does not reflect ‘like-for-like’ pay gaps for employees in the same or comparable roles
It must be said that while it is illegal to pay women less than men doing the same jobs, it is still happening. WGEA’s annual report shows that, even in their first year in the workforce, male graduates earn more than female graduates entering the same roles. Recent estimates from Australia suggest that for partners in top firms, the like-for-like gap is up to 5%.

- where there are differences it MAY be due to salary or promotion or different work under different conditions, or for any multitude of other factors.

Women don’t negotiate for better pay so it’s their fault if they’re paid less
Again, it’s not true to say women don’t ask for raises. They just don’t receive them at the same rate as men. And there is evidence that when women do negotiate, they are actually penalised.

A recent study from Cass Business School, the University of Warwick and the University of Wisconsin shows that women ask for wage rises just as often as men but men are 25% more likely to get a raise when they ask. The study collected data from 4,600 Australian workers across more than 800 employers and found no difference in the likelihood of asking between the two genders. The authors suggested that it might actually be “how” women ask, that a lack of assertiveness in negotiations is often cited as a potential reason why women might make less money than men for similar work.

As WGEA explains, negotiation is usually associated with agentic, and therefore masculine, behaviour. When employers negotiate with women, they tend to offer less and are more likely to resist influence attempts. Studies have shown that women’s reluctance to enter negotiations is partly because they are penalised more than men for doing so. The more women anticipate backlash, the less inclined they are to initiate negotiations.

In other words, women are asking for raises but, if they ask too assertively, they’re turned down for being too pushy, and if they don’t ask assertively enough, they aren’t good negotiators so they don’t get a raise.

I've acted in films - nobody offered me Tom Cruise type salary for the work..... not relevant since it is not an issue UNLESS I was paid less than Equity rates.  No woman is paid less than the required rate for her work.

http://time.com/money/4207416/hollywood-wage-gap/
Lawrence is just the most visible example of the dismal state of pay equality in Tinseltown. A 2014 study published in the Journal of Management Inquiry entitled Age, Gender, and Compensation: A Study of Hollywood Movie Stars concluded that pay for female movie stars increases until they reach 34, then rapidly decreases (as does the number of roles for women of a certain age). For men, the peak earning year is 51, and there is no noticeable decline in wages after that. As Helaine Olen noted in Slate, that means "25-year-old Lawrence has nine years to go, while 40-year-old [Bradley] Cooper has 11."
A similar thing happens to the salaries of non-celebrity workers as well. Studies have shown that earnings peak for women between the ages of 34 and 39, while wages continue to rise steadily for men until around age 50.It's worth pausing here to note that many of the traditional justifications for the wage gap just don't hold up in Tinseltown. Actors and actresses fulfill the same job in the same time frame, using the same set of tools. You can't attribute the gap to differences in productivity, strength, or women being less skilled as performers (sorry, Aaron Sorkin).

I've posted for you times many that according to a census taken here - around 2005 - the exact difference in INCOME level (not wage level) corresponded exactly to the difference in the average hours  worked by women as compared to men.

Sex discrimination in the report accounts for everything that is left after all the other factors that have an impact on the gender pay gap, such as age, tenure, time out of the workforce, occupation, industry, part-time work and sector, have been taken into account. This means that more than a third of the gender pay gap is the result of gender discrimination and unconscious bias.

No intention of linking you for the thousandth time.... you don't want to listen or hear or read.... so go find the facts for yourself - and not in some blurb put out by an organisation with an agenda to push.  We are not discussing Faroffistan here and wage differences there - YOU provide me with clear situations in Australia where women are being paid less for the same work and the same hours.

It Does Not Happen!  And you can't.

Mr Liveris claims top accounting firms including PriceWaterHouse Coopers, EY and Deloitte are paying men and women differently for the same roles with pay gaps ranging from 1 to 5 per cent.

"Even at their highest level, at the partnership level, they were finding about a 5 per cent gender pay gap in a like-for-like basis," Mr Liveris said.

Your usual inclination to label anyone else stupid, etc, shows you to be the cretin you are in reality.

I have posted times many a very solid refutation of the nonsense that makes up the 'gender wage gap' - and it is clear, from any rational review, that such a gap does not exist.

Now try another approach, sonny.

I'm not interested in twisted and distorted 'studies' by groups directly interested in arriving at the position they wish... I deal only with facts... and I've laid out those facts time and time again.

If you wish to disagree, save your puerile personal attacks, and replace them with facts.

Now - try looking at this 'study' you quote - and give me a full rendition of the actual figures, the actual laws in place HERE in Australia, and then tell me that women are being ripped off in their work.

If you have any argument - it is over AWE's - and NOT on any gender basis...  in case you missed (you obviously did) - there are currently MILLIONS of people doing it hard out there... who actually gives a damn about distorted and self-serving studies that continue to say, without solid foundation, that women as a group are being ripped off?

Then try showing me ONE clear example of where women doing exactly the same job in the same grade - outside of contracted work - are NOT being paid the proper level.

SHOW me - and save your personal attacks for someone who actually cares about your emotion-based nonsense.

If you cannot do that - save your personal cretinous vitriol for someone who might be influenced by it.. obviously I am not.

Better still - leave the field to those with a mind in their head....

In their 2016 Global Gender Gap Report, it is estimated that, at current rates, it would take another 170 years to close the global pay gap between men and women.

...please dont tell me male teachers earn more than females......

Your usual inclination to label anyone else stupid, etc, shows you to be the cretin you are in reality.

I have posted times many a very solid refutation of the nonsense that makes up the 'gender wage gap' - and it is clear, from any rational review, that such a gap does not exist.

Now try another approach, sonny.

I'm not interested in twisted and distorted 'studies' by groups directly interested in arriving at the position they wish... I deal only with facts... and I've laid out those facts time and time again.

If you wish to disagree, save your puerile personal attacks, and replace them with facts.

Now - try looking at this 'study' you quote - and give me a full rendition of the actual figures, the actual laws in place HERE in Australia, and then tell me that women are being ripped off in their work.

If you have any argument - it is over AWE's - and NOT on any gender basis...  in case you missed (you obviously did) - there are currently MILLIONS of people doing it hard out there... who actually gives a damn about distorted and self-serving studies that continue to say, without solid foundation, that women as a group are being ripped off?

Then try showing me ONE clear example of where women doing exactly the same job in the same grade - outside of contracted work - are NOT being paid the proper level.

SHOW me - and save your personal attacks for someone who actually cares about your emotion-based nonsense.

If you cannot do that - save your personal cretinous vitriol for someone who might be influenced by it.. obviously I am not.

Better still - leave the field to those with a mind in their head....

no woman can be truly fulfilled unless she is with a great man.

a great man goes out into the world and goes to war in business and gives his all and then, in order to recharge he needs to come home and have the adrenaline and cortisol dissipated from the day of brutal work and relentless effort.

only a feminine woman can perform this vital work

and by this polarity and synergy, no man can be truly fulfilled if he doesnt have a nurturing and feminine woman to come home and recharge him so that the next day he can go out and crush it for the both of them.

man on his own =  1
woman on her own = 1

man plus woman in relationship where they both try to be clones of each other and practice equality 

1 + 1 = 2.

man plus woman in relationship where each fully commits to the roles i described and recognises the awesome power of the polarity of the sexes and the role requirements thereof

1 + 1 = 11.

you synergise and supercharge your awesomeness capabilities when men act as men and women act as women.

most women DO NOT want to win, they want to be with a winner 

Quote:

No, we need to get our poo in order in our own nation first.

John Smith wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 9:22am:


Nope.  They know the explanation for that. 

Less skilled/safer jobs, shorter hours, less time spent with employers to establish seniority...and thats just the ones who actually work.  The housewives who sell avon count too.

It's just one big load of wank.

Secondly, what our study showed was that sex discrimination continues to be the single largest factor contributing to the gender pay gap, increasing from 35% in 2007 to 38% in 2014.

Sex discrimination in the report accounts for everything that is left after all the other factors that have an impact on the gender pay gap, such as age, tenure, time out of the workforce, occupation, industry, part-time work and sector, have been taken into account. This means that more than a third of the gender pay gap is the result of gender discrimination and unconscious bias.

Secondly, what our study showed was that sex discrimination continues to be the single largest factor contributing to the gender pay gap, increasing from 35% in 2007 to 38% in 2014.

there is no award or EBA in Australia which offers females less money than males for the same work. Hope this clears up your confusion, there is no gender pay gap.

rhino wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 10:07am:


There is no confusion here, but lets play your stupid game.

What about people who aren't on an award wage or covered by an EBA?

aquascoot wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 8:07am:

Thats just bollocks.

Quote:

This is also bollocks.
Quote:

Yep, still bollocks.
Quote:

Bollocks, bollocks everywhere

Quote:

I like this bit because it shows that the genders are equal. If only they were treated equally.

Quote:

Ok, a bit basic, but at least it was the shite you were peddling earlier.

Quote:

Annndd we are back to the bollocks.

Quote:

Gender roles are societal enforced bollocks.

Quote:

Oh so much goddamn bollocks.


I give your post 1/10 see me after class for reeducation.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 10:12am:
Show an example of wage disparity.

donincognito wrote on Jul 20^th, 2017 at 7:02pm:



Am I wrong or does this imply that women enter a male industry, hit critical mass and then all the pays drop?

Im wondering what industry that would be?

Low paying 'chick jobs' have always been low paying 'chick jobs' and those high paying jobs, you won't see too many women demanding to be a Diesel mechanic in some mine in the middle of Bumfkk nowhere. But those that do, do get paid very well and there isn't pay cuts for everyone because of her.

The problem is women want the top coin for the easy clean work and wouldn't we all, but those jobs are few and far between, so buck up little princesses it is what it is.

So become a diesel mechanic, apply for the FIFO job living in a remote mining camp in WA or NW QLD and make the big bucks, just like everyone else has to.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 9:34am:



don, i get why you get upset and antsy.
women have been let down by men because most men are sh**t.
most men are mediocre little bitches who whine and complain and are pussies.

so a woman looks at such a man and she thinks "i have to wear the pants, make the decisions, and i have to teach my daughter to do the same because the men in my life are such low quality mediocre lazy layabouts,that if i dont take on this task, i will be destroyed and my daughter will be destroyed.

the amswer isnt to take on these roles which the emotional feminine brain was never designed to take on and then to resent the fact that you have to "man up"

the answer is to get yourself a more high quality man, a man who will lead, a man who is not a reactive little tantrum throwing, emotionally unmastered toddler.
a "superior" man
get yourself a man who makes you feel so safe and so looked after that you can be a woman and enjoy your fun and feminine emotions which are the emotions you like to feel.

no woman could enjoy being overworked , resentful of men and stressed out all the time.

when a little girl was 10 years old, is that the future she dreamt of?

get back in touch with your inner child.

concerns with "gender pay gaps " are just diversions from whats really upsetting you

rhino wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 10:25am:

Quote:


I have, keep up.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 10:55am:


Men and other men are paid differently despite performing the same role within Australia's top accounting firms too.

The thing is, they are all guaranteed the same minimum wage.

EBAs, Modern Awards, the NES, and the National Minimum Wage do not have lower rates of pay for women.

In addition, men and women are paid differently despite performing the same role within Australia's top accounting firms, workforce diversity specialist Conrad Liveris told PM.

Mr Liveris claims top accounting firms including PriceWaterHouse Coopers, EY and Deloitte are paying men and women differently for the same roles with pay gaps ranging from 1 to 5 per cent.

"Even at their highest level, at the partnership level, they were finding about a 5 per cent gender pay gap in a like-for-like basis," Mr Liveris said.

Women don’t negotiate for better pay so it’s their fault if they’re paid less
Again, it’s not true to say women don’t ask for raises. They just don’t receive them at the same rate as men. And there is evidence that when women do negotiate, they are actually penalised.

A recent study from Cass Business School, the University of Warwick and the University of Wisconsin shows that women ask for wage rises just as often as men but men are 25% more likely to get a raise when they ask. The study collected data from 4,600 Australian workers across more than 800 employers and found no difference in the likelihood of asking between the two genders. The authors suggested that it might actually be “how” women ask, that a lack of assertiveness in negotiations is often cited as a potential reason why women might make less money than men for similar work.

As WGEA explains, negotiation is usually associated with agentic, and therefore masculine, behaviour. When employers negotiate with women, they tend to offer less and are more likely to resist influence attempts. Studies have shown that women’s reluctance to enter negotiations is partly because they are penalised more than men for doing so. The more women anticipate backlash, the less inclined they are to initiate negotiations.

In other words, women are asking for raises but, if they ask too assertively, they’re turned down for being too pushy, and if they don’t ask assertively enough, they aren’t good negotiators so they don’t get a raise.

And yet there is still a gender pay gap.


Sort out the 5 year life expectancy gap and we can look at the froth and bubble issues later.

Rubbish ... discriminating to address discrimination? 

Just like fighting for peace or f*$king for virginity ey?

They weren't being discriminated against as the jobs were never ever advertised men only.

We aren't talking just about management positions.

And discrimination in favour of one gender over another instead of the most suitable applicant is still an unwarranted discrimination.

In fact in most cases the physical requirements were lessened to facilitate women into what was previously only jobs that men worked.

That being that women previously had no desire to be out of bed all night in all weather doing physical work.

And after 10 years of watching the discrimination in favour of women & others has seen the business going backwards

....... with people without any experience or knowledge of the industry being employed as supervisiors/coordinators & managers .... & simply because of their gender, race & sexual preferences.

The gender pay gap is bollocks and so is Affirmative Action.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 11:01am:


Not in any EBA, Modern Award, the NES or the National Minimum Wage.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 11:56am:

And yet there is still a gender pay gap.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 12:04pm:

And its is a problem that should be sorted out, but first it requires people to realise there is a problem.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 12:16pm:

Societal wide transformation in how men think about and value women.
Targets and quotas to get more women into positions of power in both government and private industry.
Valuing female dominated industries as much as we value male dominated industries.
Improved flexibility for mothers wanting to reenter the workforce.
Paternity leave becoming mandatory.
Men stop thinking that other men caring for people are weak.

A lot of the biases men show in hiring practices are unconscious biases and need to be pointed out for them to be fixed.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 12:16pm:

Societal wide transformation in how men think about and value women.
Targets and quotas to get more women into positions of power in both government and private industry.
Valuing female dominated industries as much as we value male dominated industries.
Improved flexibility for mothers wanting to reenter the workforce.
Paternity leave becoming mandatory.
Men stop thinking that other men caring for people are weak.

A lot of the biases men show in hiring practices are unconscious biases and need to be pointed out for them to be fixed.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 12:20pm:


In other words:  Implementation of year zero.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 12:36pm:



The utopian vision of the Khmer Rouge, later adopted by western leftists.

Quote:

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 12:36pm:

They have the same opportunities to apply for a job that men do.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 1:15pm:


If they get the job, they can prove how good they are.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 1:23pm:


Qualified and capable men miss out on jobs every day.

Only one person can get the job.

Unless you are saying that there are no women around more capable than Dutton?

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 2:08pm:



"Mark was clearly more qualified than Karen, and he has 10 years experience in a similar position, whereas Karen has no experience with this kind of work at all."

"However, we are well under our quota of females employees so I'll be giving the job to Karen".

"It doesn't matter that our clients will suffer, and that it will take months to train Karen up to an acceptable standard".

"It's the quota that matters".

In engineering women are paid the same as men.

I would also say this would be the case for all women with a degree in

Accounting
Economics
Medicine
Science
Chemistry
Biological
Law
Commerce
Business

It's not the gender but your qualification that earns you your pay and then your commitment and dedication after that.....

I know you aren't going to and instead are going to make stupid arguments that are already refuted in the article.

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 2:08pm:



"Mark was clearly more qualified than Karen, and he has 10 years experience in a similar position, whereas Karen has no experience with this kind of work at all."

"However, we are well under our quota of females employees so I'll be giving the job to Karen".

"It doesn't matter that our clients will suffer, and that it will take months to train Karen up to an acceptable standard".

"It's the quota that matters".

donincognito wrote on Jul 21^st, 2017 at 2:08pm:


Just for women?

That's a bit unfair.

What about disabled people, homosexuals, Buddhists, fat people, etc.?