"Women earn less than men, despite laws"

What is the logic here, if the amount of money men and women make is different then something is wrong. Then I suppose we should also make sure the number of men and women in jail is also equal. Oh ya, only then are men and women different...

manonthestreet

Feminist and women in general are both fanatical and obsessive. If they possess an idea then they will just go on repeating it over and over again. There is no escape from the monotony of a woman's argument. Their mind's can only function on an ever repeating loop. That is why if women do eliminate men all-to-gether then there can be no further progress as women's thinking can only ever go round in an endless repetative cycle.

I have said before that pay should be determined w/o any government intervention. Generally people are paid what they are worth based on the law of supply and demand. There may be a few legitimate cases of discrimination (based on gender or race) that should be dealt with, but I don't believe it is widespread.

I even believe maternity leave should be a benefit that an employer has the choice of offering or not.

However, I just want to add a little about maternity leave as it is often pointed out that men do not receive paternity leave. I am all for paternity leave, but it would be a finanancial hardship for most business owners to offer. IMO, just like maternity leave, it should not be a forced benefit.

Maternity leave is for many reasons that don't concern men. Some women take it a little before their due date as they are extremely uncomfortable and may not be very productive at work.

Leading up to the due date you are constantly worried that your water is going to break with every movement, you have many aches and pains, and your body is leaking everywhere.

Then you go into labor which is very traumatic on your body - and some women have C-sections which need additional time to heal. ( I broke my tail bone during traditional labor and after 8 hours of hard labor ended up having an emergency c-section). I was a wreck when it was over.

So after the baby is born, mothers need time to heel , and of course babies need to be breastfed and babies DO NOT belong in daycares during this precious time. There have been many studies that link NOT breast feeding and over stimulating environments to ADD/ADHD. So it is also to the baby's benefit to have mom at home.

Bonding with the baby is equally important for both parents, but if a business owner had to chose which parent they were going to offer time off to, you can see why it should be the mother as she is dealing with way more things than just bonding with the baby plus the baby needs to eat as many mothers breast feed for at least a little while.

P.S. In the USA there are no federal laws that require an employer to offer PAID maternity leave.

But they must offer maternity leave as part of the federal "family and medical leave act" which is available to men and women. It basically says that you can leave your job for a period of time (w/o pay) if it relates to family or medical and your employer must give you your job back when you return.

So a new father can apply for this as well.

I sort of forgot about this law when I wrote my post above.

This sounds like a typical type of feminist argument, even if that is not what you meant. Your argument is basically, it is more important for women so we should ignore the needs of men. Paternity leave should at least involve all the bonding time women are allowed. Its not a choice between the mother or father, the employee knows nothing of the situation at home. The mother could choose to continue working, she could be an unfit parent, or leave full custody to the father. The laws do not deny a woman work during bonding time so how can it deny a father paternity leave based on the "women are more important" argument.

Did you not even read my posts??

A father already IS entitled to paternity leave under the "Family and Medical Leave Act"

Most fathers don't apply for this because most families cannot afford to have both parents w/o paychecks.

In the USA if you want paternity leave - you got it!

Please check your reading comprehension skills!

I will help you out by summing up my post:

>women need maternity leave so their bodies can heal from the trauma of child birth AND because babies need to breastfeed. These are two aspects that men don't do.

>even though women need maternity leave, I don't think employers should be forced to provide it (but it is nice if they do).

>bonding with the baby is equally important for both parents. In the USA paternity leave is available to dads for this reason if they wish to take it.

Let's stick to facts. One fact, that has been documented for several years, is that women actually earn more than their male counterparts, all else being equal.

A few snippets from the world of work to illustrate the fact:

“Canadian Women Out Earn Men: A small survey of Canadian CIOs indicates women in the role are earning at least as much and, on average, more, than their male counterparts” by Shane Schick in IT World Canada. 20.07.09.

“In an interesting twist, the LFS (Labour Force Survey) data indicate that women who work part-time actually earned almost 14% more than their male counterparts in 1998” (Galarneau & Earl, 1999; Statistics Canada, 1995, 1997).

“Another difference between the direct/indirect decompositions and the gender decompositions is the effect of switching to actual hours of work rather than the full/part-time indicator. Adding the actual hours variable shifts more of the gender gap into the characteristics component. This is due to the fact that, on average, men work longer hours than women — something that cannot be fully captured by a simple full-time, part-time split. In the most recent cohort, the coefficient component (representing differential rewards to like characteristics) was negligible (for the indirect group) or negative (for the direct group). In other words, women in the direct study stream of the 1990 cohort were actually compensated at higher levels (by 2.4 percent) than men for like characteristics. However, the gap due to coefficients does turn in favour of men for the direct group in 1995 (at 1.8 percent).”

“Differences persist in men’s and women’s time-use patterns. For example, among parents aged 25-44 who were employed full-time, men averaged 48.6 hours of paid work and work-related activities each week; for women, the figure was 38.8 hours.” (Statistics Canada. Daily. 09.11.99)

“On average, women physicians work fewer hours per week, both in the office and on-call, and see fewer patients per week.” [Source: ‘Examining the health of women physicians in Ontario: a Physician Health Program perspective’ by Ann Davidson, MSW, RSW

The number of hours of paid work is an important indicator of labour market attachment. Related activities include things like commuting, looking for work, unpaid work brought home, and coffee breaks and socializing while at work. Males have more paid work hours in every age and role group except for unmarried youth age 18-24 employed full-time, in which group females work 3% more hours per week than males. [My note: Unattached men work fewer hours than men who are supporting families. Unattached women work more hours than women who are in an intimate relationship. Ipso facto: single men and women have to support themselves, cohabiting, or separated, women are supported by their male partners. Thus, men no longer earn for themselves alone. It would be cogent to record how much of “their” earnings are for them and how much for their children and their “unpaid” female partners. We might as well ask how much of the “unpaid” work that is claimed by the female partners is for their own benefit]

UK data: In 1999, 38 per cent of all working mothers with dependent children worked for 20 hours or less per week, compared with only two per cent of fathers. Fathers are more likely to work and to work longer hours than men who are not fathers: 65 per cent of fathers worked in excess of 40 hours a week compared with 53 per cent of men who did not have dependent children.

Queen's University sociology of law professor Fiona Kay says: "Women are more likely than men to leave the practice of law, due to the hours demanded, the lack of flexibility from law firms, the lack of accommodation for child care and the stressful nature of the practice," She says that women are forced with choosing between their careers or their children, women choose to quit. Or they opt for more tolerable legal positions, just like our Chief Judge. Recent statistics from Canada's law societies show that women lawyers across the country are under-represented in private practice and over-represented in government and public sector jobs. While they make up roughly 33% of all Canadian lawyers, they make up only 26% of all lawyers in private practice, but 40% of those in non-private practice. She says that even more troubling is recent work suggesting that women associates must embody standards that are an exaggerated form of the "ideal partner." To become partner, women must "demonstrate extraordinary work commitment”. It almost sounds as if Ms. Kay was advocating that firms bypass men who demonstrate extraordinary work commitment and hire women who want to work part-time.

All women are equal, or are they not? Apparently not when it comes to maternity leave and other benefits. Janice Mucalov, writing for the Canadian Bar Association in an essay called “Women in Law”, writes: “One research lawyer called in the mid-'90s, who didn't want to be named, reports she didn¹t receive any top-up during her six-month [maternity] leave, because the firm considered her "staff" and in the same category as the secretaries.”

A Vanier Institute of the Family article called Job, family and stress among husbands, wives and lone-parents 15-64 from 1990 to 2000 presents the following data:

Trends 17 and 18 - Hours at paid jobs
On average, during a typical week, men work significantly longer hours (39 to 41 hours) at paid work than do women (30 to 33 hours).
Trend 32: A few startling, surprising or unexpected conclusions: Wives (aged 15-24) with children who are working full-time, lose about 60 days of paid work per year for family reasons.

On Tuesday, April 27, 2004, Sarah* Schmidt wrote in the Ottawa Citizen: “Female Graduates Still Earn less”. She had to confess that “male graduates also more likely to work full time”.

She continued with the dire warning: “Parents of teenage daughters take note: prepare your girls to earn less than their male peers.”

Not only are men graduates more likely to work full time, their “full time” means many more hours than their female colleagues “full time”, not to mention the difference in the choice of disciplines and specializations within the disciplines. Ms. Schmidt would have been more honest to tell parents to warn their daughters that “if you want to have the same earnings you have to work the same hours”

Ms. Schmidt continues: “… the median salary for female university graduates working full time was $37,000, compared with $42,000 with the young men”
“Full time” is an expandable term. It can mean anything more than 32 hours a week. According to Statistics Canada women tend to stay closer to the 32 hour mark whereas men average 40 hours or more.

Health Canada in its study of work-life conflict writes: "The findings from this study would suggest the following groups: men, managers and professionals, and employees who work in the not-for-profit sector. The data presented in this section unequivocally support the idea that men have heavier work demands than women. Men (regardless of sector, job type or dependent care status) spend more hours per week in paid employment than women (44.1 hours versus 40.6), are more likely to work paid overtime (34% versus 28%), unpaid overtime (55% versus 45%) and do supplemental work at home (58% versus 43%). They also spend more hours per month, on average, in paid overtime (12 hours versus 10 hours) and unpaid overtime (20 hours per month versus 14 hours). Men also have heavier travel demands (more likely to have to spend weekdays and weekends away)." [Source: The 2001 National Work–Life Conflict Study: Report One. Final Report. Health Canada, Population and Public Health Branch, March 2002 ]

On Saturday, May 1, 2004, Caroline Alphonso wrote in the Globe and Mail: “BAs mean money for women more than men, study shows” She then hastened to add that she did not mean that women graduates earn more than male graduates but that the difference between women with a university degree and women without one is greater than the difference between male graduates and males who do not have a university or college degree.

However, that is not quite true. Already as early as in 1994 Ted Wannell and Nathalie Caron documented in their study done for Statistics Canada (“THE GENDER EARNINGS GAP AMONG RECENT POSTSECONDARY GRADUATES, 1984-92; 11F0019MPE No. 68, Business and Labour Market Analysis Group, Statistics Canada) conclude that “ … the wages of women are higher than those of men when all other factors are held constant.”

The above demonstrates why the feminist sources, which Ms. Alphonso obviously uses, prefer to refer to “earnings” instead of “wages”. If my “full time” work amounts to 32 hours a week, and yours amounts to 60 hours a week, you are obviously earning more than I though my hourly wages may be higher than yours.

An excellent example of intentional attempt to create perceptions rather than disseminate facts is the following editorial on the 2001 Census; Hours of work in England & Wales:

"The data in this briefing are from the 2001 Census Key Statistics for Local Authorities in England and Wales, published by the Office for National Statistics on 13 February 2003. They reflect the situation on Census day, 29 April 2001. The report presents an editorialized summary of the findings: Four out of five women worked between 16 and 48 hours per week. The average hours worked by men in employment were 42.2 hours per week. Three-quarters of men worked 38 hours or more per week.

Considering that “16 to 48 hours per week” just about covers the entire range of hours that men and women spend each week in gainful employment, it is ridiculous to the extreme to say that “four out of every five [working] women worked between 16 and 48 hours per week”, especially as the table shows that women are highly concentrated on the lower end of the spectrum whereas higher percentages of men work the longer hours.

Only 57.55 percent of women worked full time, the average (mean) number of hours being 31.37 per week, just above the official cut-off between part-time and full time. Considerably more men worked full time (90.37 percent) and, on the average, they worked 42.21 hours per week, well above the cut-off.

An interesting contrast is the way that men’s hours are reported: “Three quarters of men worked 38 hours or more”. The editor does not mention that only about one third of women did likewise, thus about two thirds of women and one quarter of men worked less 39 hours per week. That fact makes quite a difference in the picture that is presented to us.

"28.44 percent of women worked between 16 and 30 hours per week and only 6.17 percent of men did likewise."

As 30 hours is almost double of 16 hours this statistic is meaningless, as is the statistic that 28.39 percent of women and 51.45 percent of men who worked full time worked between 39 and 48 hours a week. Far more revealing is that 6.88 percent of women and 24.12 percent of men worked 49 hours or more per week. That can indicate only one thing: as the number of hours worked increases, so does the ratio between men and women. [Women and Men in Britain: Pay and Income]

And the icing on the cake: “Their grandmothers fought for the vote, their mothers battled to have it all, but the upcoming generation of girls have decided to turn the clock back and just want stay at home with their babies. According to a survey of 5,000-plus teenage girls, their main ambition is to complete university then return to the homestead - whether their partners like it or not. More than nine out of 10 of the girls believe it should be up to their husbands to provide for them, with 97 per cent disagreeing with the statement 'It doesn't matter who is the main earner, as long as we are happy.' [Source: Teenage girls just want to marry and stay home” by Amelia Hill, The Observer, Sunday October 19, 2003] Top of Form

Wow, you must be quite testy to patronize someone for responding to your faulty post. I was responding to your hypothetical situation of the employee choosing between the man or woman. Sorry but I figured you actually had a point; either defending maternity only leave in other countries or saying that the US should follow suit. According to your second post it seems it was something like the former. Also notice the times on my first post and your second...

Fondueguy:

The reason for the timing on my second post is because I went back and added this last line:

>"I sort of forgot about this [Family Medical Leave Act] law when I wrote my post above."

All other content is the same.

I have no idea why you mistakenly think I am advocating for the USA to follow other countries by enforcing maternity leave laws. I have said MANY times that I do not believe the government should be dictating what employers pay for,

I am a co-owner of a family business. We have about 400 employees. These benefits would be expensive to provide.

Although women need and should take maternity leave, it should not be an employer's responsibility to provide this. Employers may decide to provide it, but it should not be law.

Currently in the USA employers must provide maternity AND paternity leave in accordance to "Family Medical Leave Act" . This benefit is equal to both genders. There is no pay involved, just job security.

In the USA, we have no federal laws that require maternity leave to be with pay. Only about 16% of large companies ELECT to offer PAID maternity leave, and it is rarely at 100% pay rate. I assume they offer this and not paid paternity leave because they realize the mother is healing from childbirth and breastfeeding the baby.

If the baby is stillborn or mother gives it up for adoption, the mother still needs about 6 weeks off. I understand father bonding is important (just as important as mother bonding), but to compare the needs and circumstances around paternity leave to the needs and circumstances around maternity leave is apples to oranges.

Besides the NBA would shut down if all guys got paternity leave. Can you imagine....

"Coach, I gotta kid due in October, so I need October and November off, then I have another kids due in December, so I will need December and January off, and I might have another in March, but I'm gonna wait on the DNA..... "

Or your 18 year old employee packing for Hawaii with his shortboard: "Hey boss, see I got this girl pregnant in Hawaii, so my leave is going to be paid, right?"

(I'm just having fun)

Saira: I don't have any dispute with what you have posted, as I believe people are paid what they are worth and if they don't believe it, they can seek employment elsewhere. It is common for women to take time off, work part time, etc for the sake of pregnancy and children. I have a nursing degree, but I currently am a stay at home mom. I specifically chose a carrier in nursing because it is a field that one can jump in and out without effecting pay, which is beneficial to mothers.

But could you please provide a link or more details about your comment of the "5,000 teenaged girls surveyed...". I want to see if some of the opinions are really part of the survey and the context, etc. It must have been a multiple choice survey as the feedback/attitude was so specific. They could not have all said "whether their partners like it or not" when asked about staying home.

I realize you provided the source, but I googled it and it is just to another article that mentions the survey but no original source.

Teenage girls say a lot of things (just like teenage boys), once these girls mature they may have a different opinion. I wonder what teenage boys would say if you asked them what kind of marriages they wanted if the survey was multiple choice, and had obnoxious choices to choose from.

There is nothing wrong with a spouse staying home and taking care of the kids and home. I would assume everyone is doing their share and it is agreed upon. However, I can see how there would be a problem if the other spouse was not in agreement.

Anyway, I agree with what you say, but that "survey" mentioned at the end was kind of tacky and seems to be planted to add fuel. Those types of "surveys" are known as "push-polls" and usually do not have a source.

I thought you made your point just fine w/o the tacky survey :)