Friday, July 23, 2010

Paycheck Fairness Act

 Have you read about this bill, the Paycheck Fairness Act?
This is what the fuss coming from the right is all about....


The National Committee on Pay Equity supports two bills in Congress aimed at curbing wage discrimination. The bills work on different aspects of wage discrimination, and both are needed to fully close the wage gap.
The Fair Pay Act (S. 904, H.R. 2151) is sponsored by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC). It seeks to end wage discrimination against those who work in female-dominated or minority-dominated jobs by establishing equal pay for equivalent work. For example, within individual companies, employers could not pay jobs that are held predominately by women less than jobs held predominately by men if those jobs are equivalent in value to the employer. The bill also protects workers on the basis of race or national origin. The Fair Pay Act makes exceptions for different wage rates based on seniority, merit, or quantity or quality of work. It also contains a small business exemption.

The Paycheck Fairness Act (H.R.12 and S.182) was introduced January 2009 by then-Senator Hillary Clinton and Rep. Rosa DeLauro to strengthen the Equal Pay Act of 1963. The bill expands damages under the Equal Pay Act and amends its very broad fourth affirmative defense. In addition, the Paycheck Fairness Act calls for a study of data collected by the EEOC and proposes voluntary guidelines to show employers how to evaluate jobs with the goal of eliminating unfair disparities. The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on January 9, 2009, ADD and action by the Senate is pending, under the lead sponsorship of Sen. Christopher Dodd.


President Obama has issued a statement endorsing a gender pay equity law,  covered in today's USA TODAY.
Here's the statement:
In America today, women make up half of the workforce, and two-thirds of American families with children rely on a woman's wages as a significant portion of their families' income.
Yet, even in 2010, women make only 77 cents for every dollar that men earn. The gap is even more significant for working women of color, and it affects women across all education levels. As Vice President Biden and the Middle Class Task Force will discuss today, this is not just a question of fairness for hard-working women. Paycheck discrimination hurts families who lose out on badly needed income. And with so many families depending on women's wages, it hurts the American economy as a whole. In difficult economic times like these, we simply cannot afford this discriminatory burden.
My Administration has already begun to address this problem. In my first week in office, I signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which helps women who face wage discrimination recover their lost wages, and in my State of the Union Address, I promised to crack down on violations of equal pay laws. Today the Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force will present its recommendations, which include ways to better coordinate among enforcement agencies and inform employees about their rights. These steps support women, and they also support businesses that are doing the right thing and paying their employees what they deserve.
We cannot do this work alone. So today, I thank the House for its work on this issue and encourage the Senate to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, a common-sense bill that will help ensure that men and women who do equal work receive the equal pay that they and their families deserve. Passing this bill is one of the Task Force's key recommendations, and I hope Congress will act swiftly so that I can sign it into law.
I'm really not sure why the right would defend inequality, John Boehner called the equity bill a cruel hoax. He is worried about trial lawyers clogging up the courts with junk lawsuits. He says these laws will make it hard for businesses to grow and hire! That is friggin laughable!   Don't you see Mr. Bonehead, if there was equality in the workplace there would not be lawsuits based on gender discrimination. Of course the righties want the companies to do as they please no matter who it hurts, no matter who is discriminated against. OH God-forbid the government steps in to help the helpless stand up to big crooked business practices!

This is the point of view from a conservative blogger...

The Obama administration demonstrates again that they have no clue as to how to conduct business, nor can they grasp common-sense concepts regarding how businesses operate and succeed in order to employ all those minorities, woman and others. This is frankly another political move to extract yet another fistful of power (and more than likely, substantial fees and fines) from small businesses. 
Things are not always as they appear to be on paper, so the opportunity for misunderstanding and error looms. Not all jobs are equal, nor are their responsibilities and stresses. This will limit the rewarding of excellence and reward possible mediocrity under the guise of equality. This is just one more decision taken away from the employer and placed with the Federal government...plain old garden variety "interference" under another name. No one supports discrimination anywhere, and blatant discrimination of any kind should be ended, but this is just so over the line of what the responsibilities of our government should be, This is big brother taking liberty away from private business owners and saddling them with business-destroying regulation and taxation. Will any area of our lives be left intact when the Obama crew finally (please God)packs it in and leaves Washington?


what you have here is a delusional Beck watching, Limbaugh quoting, Heritage Foundation worshipper. Sorry rightwing nut, progress marches forward, equality for ALL Americans FINALLY!!

 Thank God for our democratic president who understands the abuses we have endured for far too many generations. Thank you Mr. President!

33 comments:

TOM said...

If someone sues because they are being paid less than someone else, for the same work, that is what Republicans call a junk lawsuit.
Republicans are so full of it.

Lisa said...

why don't we just let let this admin take over the entire economy? They are almost there already and we see how well that worked in Russia.

Unknown said...

"He is worried about trial lawyers clogging up the courts with junk lawsuits"

The right seems to conjure up any excuse they can to avoid fairness and humanitarian efforts.

Pathetic!!

@lisa - what does Russia have to do with fair pay? I have a hard time wrapping my head around your statement.

Leslie Parsley said...

Beck & Co. might dance to a different tune when their wives have to go to work to support them. Oh, I forgot. They've already made bookoodles of money off their followers who are too dumb to know they're being had - people like Lisa. Kind of like those TV evangelists.

Sue said...

hey guys thanks for coming today. I accidentally unplugged my phone line while painting a piece of furniture and was without internet connection for hours, then I thought to check the line, DUH!! (old age) LOL!

I'm trying to get around to everyones blogs tonight, sorry I've been so lazy about commenting but I've been painting up a storm this week! Not much else to do since it's 100 degrees outside and I'm forced to stay inside with the AC blasting.

Hope you have a great weekend and it's cooler where you are!

Silverfiddle said...

More feel-good twaddle from the left.

This is still the United States of America, not a Communist workers paradise where the state sets everybody's wages.

This is all liberal BS. Thomas Sowell has definitively shown that inequality issues such as these are patently false and based upon statistical ignorance (or worse, deliberate manipulation for narrow partisan gain)

Go check this out to see the other side of the argument.

Dr Sowell disaggregated the data and found that within each career area (sales, banking, janitor, professor, etc) there was no pay disparity. Women tend towards career field that make less than the career fields men are biased towards. As a group, they also have more breaks in their work history.

Let me ask you this Sue:

If you and I both mowed lawns and you consistently did a better job than me, should I get paid the same as you?

Should the difference come out of your pocket?

Sue said...

"The Fair Pay Act makes exceptions for different wage rates based on seniority, merit, or quantity or quality of work. It also contains a small business exemption."

"Yet, even in 2010, women make only 77 cents for every dollar that men earn. The gap is even more significant for working women of color, and it affects women across all education levels."

How can you argue these points SF??

Silverfiddle said...

Sue,
This is your blog, so I will be especially polite.

Please follow the link I provided and get back to me.

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics"

jadedj said...

" will make it hard for businesses to grow and hire".

This is their standard excuse regards any legislation to protect the employees.

Sue said...

SF, I don't believe I will take Thomas Sowells word as gospel the way you rightwingers do, sorry but I have read him and find him amusing, not news worthy and factual.

Leslie Parsley said...

How can you be painting in this heat even with AC? Shouldn't you have a window open?

Silverfiddle said...

Sue:
Even scholars on the left do not discount Dr. Sowell. You may disagree with his opinions, but his research is rock solid. He is over 80 years old and he has an impeccable research record and his integrity has never been called into question.

The same can't be said of Rachel Madcow, the leg tingler, and Keith Oberthetop.

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Regarding Silverfiddle's claim that it's "all liberal BS" and that we should check out the link he provided for proof that pay inequity has been definitively proven to be "patently false and based upon statistical ignorance (or worse, deliberate manipulation for narrow partisan gain)"...

The link is to a post on his blog. And that post backs up it's claim with a link to ANOTHER Silverfiddle blog! No thanks, Silverfiddle, I'll do my own investigation.

Turns out Thomas Sowell is a conservative economist and a "Senior fellow" at the Conservative/Libertarian Hover Institution (a Conservative think tank founded by Republican President Herbert Hover).

You know who I think deliberately manipulates facts for partisan gain? If you guessed Conservative think tanks you guessed right!

According to Source Watch, "Think tanks are like universities minus the students and minus the systems of peer review and other mechanisms that academia uses to promote diversity of thought. Real academics are expected to conduct their research first and draw their conclusions second, but this process is often reversed at most policy-driven think tanks".

and

"[Conservative] Think tanks are funded primarily by large businesses and major foundations... [Conservative] think tanks are little more than public relations fronts ... In general ... research from [Conservative] think tanks is ideologically driven in accordance with the interests of its [Conservative] funders".

FYI all the "Conservatives" were added by me, because I think they increase the accuracy of the Source Watch article. And yes, I know that Source Watch is a LIBERAL nonprofit American-based media research group (I point that out to save Silverfiddle the trouble).

Silverfiddle said...

Continue wallowing in your ignorance, Dervish...

Sowell's scholarship and research are beyond reproach. Despite what your little liberal hate site says, just because something is "conservative" or "liberal" doesn't make it automatically wrong.

I will also cite the Brookings Institution, a "liberal" think tank, because they also do good research without the MSNBC or Media Matters smoke and mirrors.

The people Sue quotes in the article are alleging pay disparity. The burden falls on them to prove it.

And you can't just use all men vs. all women in the aggregate. It must be disaggregated data showing a true side by side comparison (women brain surgeons vs. men brain surgeons with similar work history)

Sue said...

I thought w's comment was a good one, he thinks the same as I but says it so much better then I ever could! Thanks w. I have no desire to read Thomas Sowell even if he is a scholar SF. He's too biased for my taste.

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Silverfiddle said... Sowell's scholarship and research are beyond reproach.

So you say... But I'm not taking your word for it. If this is true then where's the link to back this claim up?

Thomas Sowell represents the "blame the victim" mentality of the Right we see over and over (like blaming the CRA instead of Wall Street greed for the recent financial meltdown).

Sowell is a defender of the 1995 Bell Curve study which asserted IQ is genetic and that blacks scored lower on IQ tests than whites. (FYI Sowell is African-American).

He claims that pay inequity complaints are "patently false"? What a surprise!

Silverfiddle said...

Dr Sowell has 50 years of scholarship, but you say he's no good, so we'll go with that...

BTW, you have grossly mischaracterized his positions, especially on the bell curve. It is obvious you have not read his actual work, but rather you dived into the internet sewers that merely talk about what they think he said.

It's not very smart to criticize a work you have not read.

Now, where's the data supporting your alleged pay disparity? Put up or shut up time...

Silverfiddle said...

Dervish:

Educate yourself. Here are three article written by Dr. Sowell concerning "The Bell Curve" and race and IQ in general:

http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2002/10/01/race_and_iq

http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2002/10/02/race_and_iq_part_ii

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell100402.asp

If you're going to smear a man, at least do him the courtesy of reading his work first.

TOM said...

Republicans simply announce that there is no more problem, so Democratic policies to make things more equal for all are not necessary.
There is no longer racism, so affirmative action measures are no longer needed. Even though the government has statistics and complaints to prove there is a problem.
There is no pay differences between men and women, so laws trying to balance pay differences are not needed. Even though the government has statistics and complaints to prove there is a problem.
The poor that are suffering is no concern of the American government, so extended unemployment benefits are not needed; neither is a raise in funding for welfare, food stamps, etc., even though we are going through the worst economic times since the Great Depression.
It's not surprising that SF would link to his own writings to prove his own point again, and again.
We get nowhere debating opinions. We cannot get Republicans to accept facts. So we spend our time shooting down their fear tactics and lies. What a waste of time.

Silverfiddle said...

I'm still waiting for the data supporting the contention of a pay disparity.

You keep talking statistics, tom, but it seems that subject is like the weather. Everybody talks about it, but nobody does anything about it.

All kinds of real problems do exist in this country. The question is, why? What are the root causes, and how can we address them?

Contrary to liberal belief, that is what Dr. Sowell researches and writes about.

TOM said...

Since the Congress uses government statistics, that's what should be used when debating the problem, or bills aimed at those problems.
Census, Labor Dept., unemployment , etc. all have raw statistics. These Dept's are staffed by career people, no matter who has majority, or the White House. You can find them easily on the net. I leave that to you. You need to do your own research.
The Whitewater investigation officially ended just a few months ago. Ten years after Clinton left office. They found no wrong doing by either Bill, or Hillery. Impeached for a sexual matter, which he lied about to save his family grief. Oh yes, we could keep investigation Bush for years, but Democrats don't have the mean streak Republicans do.

Silverfiddle said...

No tomtom, you're making the allegation of unfair pay disparity, you bring the information to support your allegation. The burden of proof is on the person making the accusation.

It's all just blather with nothing to support it. That's how it works in the real world.

What the heck does President Clinton have to do with this?????????

I have criticized the repubs numerous times for impeaching him. It was a stupid, partisan pursuit.

Clinton was a good Reaganomics president. He cooperated with the republican congress to keep the economy going while balancing the budget.

TOM said...

I'll go with the government statistics. They are reported in the press on a regular basis. They are the same numbers Obama cites. I disregard any other numbers, because the government numbers are the numbers legislators use to proof their bills educate yourself. Do your own homework. You don't even know the government numbers, yet, you blast them
.

Sue said...

Tom how truthful this one sentence is...

we could keep investigation Bush for years, but Democrats don't have the mean streak Republicans do.

the dems ARE TOO nice aren't they?! dems hate to step on anyone's feet and surely do not want to stir up any trouble for their colleagues!

I'll take governments numbers over a partisan scholar any day!

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Silverfiddle said... It's not very smart to criticize a work you have not read.

I did not criticize any specific "work" by Thomas Sowell. I pointed out that he's a Conservative economist from a Conservative think tank with an agenda. The agenda is to blame women for pay disparities. Because they get pregnant and take time off to birth and raise children. That's why they earn less, not because employers discriminate. Which is nonsense.

A 2007 study from the American Association of University Women found that, even when accounting for such factors as the number of hours worked, occupations or parenthood -- women earn less than men for the same work.

I don't understand why you keep insisting that no information to support the allegation of pay disparity has been provided. The information is in Sue's original post! The VERY FIRST sentence says that the legislation is supported by The National Committee on Pay Equity. They have an entire page of reports HERE.

A tactic intended to divert attention away from the fact that you haven't provided any evidence to support your claim that "Sowell's scholarship and research are beyond reproach" and "even scholars on the left do not discount Dr. Sowell". I'd be interested in knowing which scholars on the left you're referring to. Even though "not discounting" someone's conclusions isn't the same thing as agreeing with them completely.

BTW I read the first two articles by Sowell that you linked to. In the second one Sowell quotes, and agrees with another author who claims, "anti-intellectualism in the black culture keeps many black youngsters from doing their best" (and he argues against affirmative action). My point was that he is in lock step with the Republican meme that whatever the problem is, blame the victim.

The study I linked to earlier points out that "just a year after graduating from college, women earn just 80 percent of what men make". This wouldn't be the case if pay disparity could be attributed to lifestyle choices. In a 2008 article posted on Slate, Dahlia Lithwick asks "How long will women shoulder the blame for the pay gap?". The answer is -- so long as Conservatives continue to believe that blaming the victim is a strategy that works.

I do agree with you about Clinton and Reagonomics. This explains why our country is in the financial trouble it is in today. 30 years of Conservative economics have driven us deeply into debt. Allowing the bush tax cuts to expire isn't enough. We need to go back to pre-Reagan tax rates.

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

BTW, Silverfiddle, the Brookings Institution -- which you say you are going to cite but then don't -- isn't Liberal.

According to their Wikipedia entry, they "represent diverse points of view" and describe themselves as non-partisan -- which I believe is accurate.

FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting), a progressive media criticism organization, says...

To this day, Brookings is commonly, and inaccurately, dubbed "liberal" ... It's called "centrist" almost as often, but never "conservative", though that label would be more accurate than "liberal". In fact, much of Brookings' top brass has come from Republican administrations. ... The liberal tag for Brookings is itself a victory of right-wing think tanks.

Silverfiddle said...

The Salon article is useless for this discussion. It's just opinion.

As for the other link. Thank you. You prove my point. It is obvious you don't read your own damned citations!

Here are some quotes from your source:

Among the significant factors were work patterns, choice of industry, choice of occupation, race, marital status, and job tenure. The two major factors seemingly affecting wages are the differences in industries and occupations females and males choose, and the work patterns they have at those jobs (GAO, 10).

Differences in career choices between men and women are documented at the college level. Men more often choose majors that are hard sciences; while women choose those involving humanities and education. In 2000, women earned only 36% of all physical science degrees, 27% of all degrees in computer and information sciences, and a mere 17% in engineering (BPWF, 6).


Don't get bored now, here's the money quote:

So, how can the other 21% be explained? Simply, not all factors that could possibly affect wage disparity are measurable. Moreover, it is virtually impossible to come up with every factor that could possibly affect wages (GAO, 19-20). Certainly, other factors exist that have yet to be studied and tested. In addition, there is the possibility of discrimination ("just because you are a woman, I will pay you less"). However, measuring that possibility by examining statistical aggregates, either nationally or in a particular state, is complicated because of the number of variables involved.

You just provided sources that prove Dr. Sowell's point.

Thanks!

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Silverfiddle said... You just provided sources that prove Dr. Sowell's point.

Huh? Do you even know what the hell we are discussing here?? We were talking about pay disparities between men and women who have the same qualifications, same job, and who make the same lifestyle choices. Not different qualifications, jobs, and lifestyle choices.

The Salon article points to a STUDY. Which is why I used the word. Usually STUDY implies investigations and conclusions based on those investigations, not opinions.

Also, you still haven't provided any proof that "Sowell's scholarship and research are beyond reproach" or "even scholars on the left do not discount Dr. Sowell".

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

BTW, the sentences you selectively pulled from the page I linked to do NOT invalidate all claims of pay discrimination -- because they don't tell the whole story. The Salon article concludes by saying, "It's perfectly reasonable to acknowledge that women's career and lifestyle choices (which are strongly impacted by the division of domestic roles, according to the study) do affect the wage gap -- so long as you acknowledge that gender discrimination does, too".

Gender discrimination is real, and I don't see what the hell your problem is with a law that covers such situations. Violations would still need be to be PROVED. My guess is that citing biased economists like Sowell is simply a cover for your misogyny (and the misogyny of others on the Right). And the Right's continual desire to blame the victim, of course.

Silverfiddle said...

OK dervish, I've been very patient with you. Let me quote again Your Source:

So, how can the other 21% be explained? Simply, not all factors that could possibly affect wage disparity are measurable. Moreover, it is virtually impossible to come up with every factor that could possibly affect wages (GAO, 19-20). Certainly, other factors exist that have yet to be studied and tested. In addition, there is the possibility of discrimination ("just because you are a woman, I will pay you less"). However, measuring that possibility by examining statistical aggregates, either nationally or in a particular state, is complicated because of the number of variables involved.

Thank you again for proving what I've been saying. Your stubbornness in the face of verifiable facts also explains much about liberalism.

You really should read the stuff you link to. You're embarrassing yourself.

Of all the supposed wage discrimination cases, only 21% are unexplainable. So, 79% are explained by the factors that Dr Sowell cites.

21% are unexplainable by the factors I mention, and even those, according to the study's authors, cannot be explained by the data. Maybe it's gender discrimination, maybe it's due to some other factor.

The Prophet Dervish Z Sanders said...

Silverfiddle, YOU clearly stated that "inequality issues such as these are patently false and based upon statistical ignorance". And that "there was no pay disparity".

Then you said "maybe it's gender discrimination, maybe it's due to some other factor".

So which is it Silverfiddle?? Pay disparity due to gender discrimination is "patently false" and does not happen.

Or "maybe" it does??

Why don't you get back to me when you decide which it is. In the meantime maybe you should be quite and stop embarrassing yourself.

In the case of Lilly Ledbetter it was pretty clear she was being discriminated against. And yet Conservatives like you seem to be just fine with gender discrimination when it occurs, and loudly oppose legislation to address the concerns of it's victims.

Disgusting.

Silverfiddle said...

Well, Dervish, that 21% needs to be investigated. Some may be discrimination, and some may be due to causes yet unknown, like your source says.

As for the statistical ignorance, you are exhibit A.

Based on this chain, I can tell you are walking out a smarter man than when you walked in. Had you not decided to pick an argument with someone who knows what he was talking about you never would have learned anything.

Get your facts straight next time and you won't embarrass yourself.