Google's underpaying men comparex to women for similar work. Lobby says revealing this undermines womens discrimination.

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,545
414
460
#1
A survey of salaries at Google revealed a surprising result: "Men were being paid less money than women for doing similar work," said Daisuke Wakabayashi at The New York Times. Google managers can adjust pay based on a subjective assessment of whether an employee's pay is in line with "peers who make similar contributions." Though the company has been accused of bias against women in the past, Google's 2018 analysis found that in these judgments managers actually tilted too far in the other direction.
Google's study should be seen as a good sign for women's progress in tech, said Elizabeth Nolan Brown at Reason. Instead, the professional gender-equality lobby is "insisting that the study only masks much deeper discrimination."
So basically Women complained about Men being paid for the same work, Google does the opposite of that and underpays men instead, but instead of addressing this inequality Google paid people off and feminist organization said theres still discrimination against women, even though they are getting paid more. And. Revealing that women were being overpaid undermines the discrimination of women getting paid less, even though they are paid more.

What?
 
Last edited:
Sep 26, 2014
1,904
1,103
330
#4
It's not about equality to these types, it's about power.
Funny how every organization that looks into it seems to not find that women are being underpaid. They all seem to have to either say men are underpaid or give men raises to bring them in line with women's compensation.

I will not disagree with anyone on the fact that there is an earnings gap. And its probably around 20%. Mostly because of decisions that women and men make. I hate how these groups push an earnings gap as a wage gap. Its about as disingenuous as you can get.
 
Dec 3, 2013
18,490
12,244
565
#5
Slaves dream not of freedom, but of becoming masters

Same everywhere, nobody needs equality - everybody wants power.
For decades painting your group as a victim class, which you effectively obtain that victim narrative in a highly charged IdPol time in society.

Then you become the oppressor yourself but still use that victim narrative to shield you from criticism.

Anyone with half a brain can see this, it's only those who subscribe to ideology that are blind to it, or at least pretend to not see it.
 
Last edited:
Dec 15, 2011
2,164
3,474
535
#6
Oh no. The right kind of sexism is under threat by the wrong kind of sexism.
Time to double down on victim-hood and shaming.

So basically Women complained about Men being paid for the same work, Google does the opposite of that and underpays men instead, but instead of addressing this inequality Google paid people off and feminist organization said theres still discrimination against women, even though they are getting paid more. And. Revealing that women were being overpaid undermines the discrimination of women getting paid less, even though they are paid more.

What?
#alreadyestablishednarrative.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2018
1,677
1,146
230
#14
So Google male employees are getting paid less?

Awesome, so when is Google going to top up men's pay? Where's all the guys at Google protesting and wanting a pay hike? Where's the women's groups saying Google should pay more to men?

Let me guess, Google won't do anything and the guys working at Google won't give a shit and just keep doing what their doing, and any group advocating pay equality between men and women will slither away and disappear.

Am I right so far?
 
Last edited:
Likes: hariseldon
Apr 25, 2009
8,460
9,719
830
Australia
#17
I don't see the big deal about a company reducing a gap, and accidentally creating a new gap, then making a correction to that gap, being able to catch it all with particular wage reviews.
Where does it say they have corrected it?

The wage gap argument has been at the root of many discriminatory corporate policies for decades. Even Obama pushed the narrative and signed laws to address it (https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-obama-ad-says-women-are-paid-77-cents-dolla/). It has been shown time and time again that it is a deliberate distortion of reality, namely that women as a group earn less than men when you look at equivalent full time earnings across all occupations. Therefore, even the terminology is wrong. It is an equivalent full time earnings gap (annual earnings inc. overtime), not a wage gap (hourly rate).

Feminists pushing the wage gap are comparing apples with watermelons and they conveniently never talk about the cumulative effect of individual choices on group-level statistics. It ignores the fact that men do the vast majority of dirty jobs and jobs that are most likely to result in death/permanent injury. There is danger pay for good reason — because those jobs involve risk, the foundation of competitive enterprise. In fact, the number of hours that the average man works compared to the average woman is disproportionately higher than the amount the average woman is paid less than the average man. When you convert to equivalent units, i.e. hourly wage, women as a group are overpaid relative to men as a group.

So no, you don’t get to handwave it away as “not a big deal” now when it has been shown to have created actual inequality based on false pretenses.
 
Last edited:
Mar 12, 2019
32
19
75
#20
Where does it say they have corrected it?

The wage gap argument has been at the root of many discriminatory corporate policies for decades. Even Obama pushed the narrative and signed laws to address it (https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-obama-ad-says-women-are-paid-77-cents-dolla/). It has been shown time and time again that it is a deliberate distortion of reality, namely that women as a group earn less than men when you look at equivalent full time earnings across all occupations. Therefore, even the terminology is wrong. It is an equivalent full time earnings gap (annual earnings inc. overtime), not a wage gap (hourly rate).

Feminists pushing the wage gap are comparing apples with watermelons and they conveniently never talk about the cumulative effect of individual choices on group-level statistics. It ignores the fact that men do the vast majority of dirty jobs and jobs that are most likely to result in death/permanent injury. There is danger pay for good reason — because those jobs involve risk, the foundation of competitive enterprise. In fact, the number of hours that the average man works compared to the average woman is disproportionately higher than the amount the average woman is paid less than the average man. When you convert to equivalent units, i.e. hourly wage, women as a group are overpaid relative to men as a group.

So no, you don’t get to handwave it away as “not a big deal” now when it has been shown to have created actual inequality based on false pretenses.
Google does an equity pay gap every year, and this year they tracked a new category, new hires, which caused another correction. The reason why this is news is because they have a class action lawsuit on their hands.
 
Apr 25, 2009
8,460
9,719
830
Australia
#21
Google does an equity pay gap every year, and this year they tracked a new category, new hires, which caused another correction. The reason why this is news is because they have a class action lawsuit on their hands.
Again, where did they say they corrected it? All I’ve seen is that they identified it after an audit was initiated to address female inequality. Now there are feminist “academics” somehow still trying to attribute it to discrimination against women?

Moreover, since when is equity a good policy? Do you understand the difference between equity and equality? You havent addressed a single thing in my post.
 
Mar 12, 2019
32
19
75
#25
Again, where did they say they corrected it? All I’ve seen is that they identified it after an audit was initiated to address female inequality. Now there are feminist “academics” somehow still trying to attribute it to discrimination against women?

Moreover, since when is equity a good policy? Do you understand the difference between equity and equality? You havent addressed a single thing in my post.
That's why the audit was introduced, but it's not limited to just making sure that woman have equal pay for equal work, with additional factors for experience, negotiation, etc. Google uses it as a basic tool, and they take action on it, even if right now it's still being used against them in a lawsuit.

And just because Google has equal pay for equal work doesn't mean that Microsoft does. Google doesn't represent the entire employment world, which feminists would target. But last I checked there wasn't much of a difference between men and women due to all of the work that had been done in the last couple of decades by feminists and others.

So today you can really say that dropping out of work to have children has the biggest impact on wage differences, where as before you'd have a difference just for being a woman.

A lot of companies do what Google does, where they have min and max for every position, and then also have room for more special circumstances. Things usually work that way, so it's not up to me to "choose equity or equality". It's not something that I can change.

But if it were up to me, I'm a republican so I think it's obvious that I prefer companies do whatever they want to do.
 
Last edited:

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
4,087
1,422
475
#27
So today you can really say that dropping out of work to have children has the biggest impact on wage differences, where as before you'd have a difference just for being a woman.
I'd challenge that to be the only (or even main reason).

Notable: Married men earn $30k more than single men

There is another stat showing that even for childless couple women are likely to start earning less after getting married and the effect is bigger the higher the husband's income.
 
Mar 12, 2019
32
19
75
#30
I'd challenge that to be the only (or even main reason).

Notable: Married men earn $30k more than single men

There is another stat showing that even for childless couple women are likely to start earning less after getting married and the effect is bigger the higher the husband's income.
That's a significant reason, but definitely not the only one. But for the average job like retail, not mining, there's not much of a gap. I don't see why you posted the married man thing though.
 
Last edited:
Feb 1, 2017
4,087
1,422
475
#34
Doesn't that link hurt your argument?
Could you elaborate?

Noted, but what does that matter here?
My point was it's not (only) about the kids, there are other major (that's what 30k a year difference is in my books, I might be too poor though) factors at play.
The more husband earns, the bigger wife's salary dives (compared to when she was single), regardless if they have kids.
Not so well earning men also are twice as likely to be single in middle age, so men are more motivated to seek better income.
 
Dec 19, 2018
31
30
100
#35
  • Vow

    Vow

Men are attracted to youth in women, women are attracted to success in men. Women can't do anything about aging but men can at least do something about trying to be successful. Feminism might be an act of revenge for this iniquitous state of affairs by wanting men to be stripped of success just as time strips women of youth.

There is some sense in which feminists are to women what incels are to men. It would be illuminating to know how many childless and divorced women identify as feminists or who were indoctrinated by feminism - women can be victims of feminism too as this article by feminist Kate Millet's sister harrowingly describes: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/240037/marxist-feminisms-ruined-lives-mallory-millett.

"I’ve known women who fell for this creed in their youth who now, in their fifties and sixties, cry themselves to sleep decades of countless nights grieving for the children they'll never have and the ones they coldly murdered because they were protecting the empty loveless futures they now live with no way of going back. “Where are my children? Where are my grandchildren?" they cry to me.

"Your sister's books destroyed my sister's life!" I've heard numerous times. "She was happily married with four kids and after she read those books, walked out on a bewildered man and didn't look back." The man fell into despairing rack and ruin. The children were stunted, set off their tracks, deeply harmed; the family profoundly dislocated and there was “no putting Humpty-Dumpty together again.”
But whereas society holds up feminism as a default ideal with cult-like fervour, it really has very little problem in talking down and casting out incels. The shared dismissiveness and disgust for incels seemingly unites people of both sexes and across the political spectrum. Incels will never become a rallying cause for those interested in equality because women have decided they are not good enough, and that's the end of that. This is a horrifying thought to me as I think that every person deserves a chance at a loving relationship, even though incels effectively want to do to women what feminists wanted to do to men.

Perhaps this is why men and women who get married and have kids end up with the husband out earning other men and their wives. The family unit restores the balance. Children return time to mothers and make fathers fight to be successful for his family's sake, no matter what society thinks.