-
colubridae
- Custom Rank: Rank
- Posts: 2771
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:16 pm
- About me: http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Ed ... Stars.html
- Location: Birmingham art gallery
-
Contact:
Post
by colubridae » Fri Apr 30, 2010 2:41 pm
Pappa wrote:colubridae wrote:There were once two racehorses called wun-wun and tu-tu
I read in the news
'Wun-wun won a race today tu-tu won one too'

<== colubridae
You're basic knowledge of Welsh might decipher a bit of this....
Mae dada da 'da dad. (Phon. "My dada da da dad") => My dad has got good cows.
Mae da da 'da dad. (Phon. "My da da da dad") => My dad has got good sweets.
Mae dy dei di du yn dda. (Phon. "My dur day dee dee un tha") => You're black tie is good.
Sounds more like morse code.
But I love it.

I have a well balanced personality. I've got chips on both shoulders
-
Coito ergo sum
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by Coito ergo sum » Fri Apr 30, 2010 2:45 pm
maiforpeace wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:
The census does not control for factors like education and experience, occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and the fact that women tend to cluster in lower-paying fields (teaching, psychology, secretarial). It does not factor in that the most-educated swath of women, for example, gravitates toward the teaching and nursing fields. Men with comparable education become business executives, scientists, doctors and lawyers — jobs that pay significantly more. And, that women are far more likely to take time off to start a family or work part-time while rearing one.
Men get paid more in those jobs that have been typically female dominated, like teaching and nursing. Why is that?
I would want to see the data for that. Teachers are generally paid according to rigid pay schedules, and nurses too. Hospitals tend to have strict pay structures with little, if any, discretion in what they offer a person.
-
maiforpeace
- Account Suspended at Member's Request
- Posts: 15726
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:41 am
- Location: under the redwood trees
Post
by maiforpeace » Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:27 pm
Coito ergo sum wrote:maiforpeace wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:
The census does not control for factors like education and experience, occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and the fact that women tend to cluster in lower-paying fields (teaching, psychology, secretarial). It does not factor in that the most-educated swath of women, for example, gravitates toward the teaching and nursing fields. Men with comparable education become business executives, scientists, doctors and lawyers — jobs that pay significantly more. And, that women are far more likely to take time off to start a family or work part-time while rearing one.
Men get paid more in those jobs that have been typically female dominated, like teaching and nursing. Why is that?
I would want to see the data for that. Teachers are generally paid according to rigid pay schedules, and nurses too. Hospitals tend to have strict pay structures with little, if any, discretion in what they offer a person.
Equal pay for women? Not till 2050
Even in predominantly female fields like nursing and teaching, women still earn less than men: female nurses earn 91 percent and female teachers earn 87 percent of what their male counterparts do.
-
Trolldor
- Gargling with Nails
- Posts: 15878
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:57 am
-
Contact:
Post
by Trolldor » Fri Apr 30, 2010 4:40 pm
Coito ergo sum wrote:born-again-atheist wrote:Yes, there is. Census tells alls.
Actually, it does not. There is insufficient information in the census data.
The census does not control for factors like education and experience, occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and the fact that women tend to cluster in lower-paying fields (teaching, psychology, secretarial). It does not factor in that the most-educated swath of women, for example, gravitates toward the teaching and nursing fields. Men with comparable education become business executives, scientists, doctors and lawyers — jobs that pay significantly more. And, that women are far more likely to take time off to start a family or work part-time while rearing one.
For example,over a period of 15 years, according to a 2004 study by the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR), a full 52% of women in the prime earning age range of 26 to 59 go through at least one full calendar year earning nothing at all, compared with just 16% of men. So, while those women may come back to work in a job that is performed by men, it does not seem reasonable for those returning workers to get the same money as those who did not take time off. If a worker takes a year or so off after working for 5 years with an employer, and 2 workers, one male and one female, work those five years, and continue to work through the year or so off, is it "equal" to pay the returning worker who took a year or so off the same as the workers who did not take that time off?
I rue the day when the pay gap is measured by comparing different professions, as it produces shite like this.
"The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don't like that statement but few can argue with it."
-
Deep Sea Isopod
- Bathynomus giganteus
- Posts: 7806
- Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:09 am
- Location: Gods blind spot.
-
Contact:
Post
by Deep Sea Isopod » Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:12 pm
maiforpeace wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:
The census does not control for factors like education and experience, occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and the fact that women tend to cluster in lower-paying fields (teaching, psychology, secretarial). It does not factor in that the most-educated swath of women, for example, gravitates toward the teaching and nursing fields. Men with comparable education become business executives, scientists, doctors and lawyers — jobs that pay significantly more. And, that women are far more likely to take time off to start a family or work part-time while rearing one.
Men get paid more in those jobs that have been typically female dominated, like teaching and nursing. Why is that?
Coito ergo sum wrote:Feck wrote:Pappa wrote:
I saw that on the news. Binmen make £32,000 a year on average. I'm in the wrong job!
No BinMEN get up to 20'000 PA on top in Bonus !!!!!
What's a "binman?" And, shouldn't it be "binperson?"

I think that's a garbage collector. Looks like the UK needs to adopt our non-sexist term.

'man' in it's original meaning means 'person' (regardless of gender)
I run with scissors. It makes me feel dangerous

-
Coito ergo sum
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by Coito ergo sum » Thu May 13, 2010 1:04 pm
Women CEO's make more than men:
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/women-ceos-sal ... d=10630664
Women CEOs Beat Men in Pay in 2009
Glass Ceiling Cracking? While Male CEOs Took Pay Cuts Women got Raises Averaging Nearly 30 Percent
AY
May 12, 2010
PrintRSSFONT SIZE:SHARE:EmailTwitterFacebookMore
While the average earnings for women still lag behind those of men, they're turning the tables in the most exclusive corporate club of all. A new report from Bloomberg News, the leading provider of business news worldwide, shows that women who head the nation's largest companies are earning substantially more than their male counterparts. Their average annual pay over the last few years? Just over $14 million dollars.
Salaries of women in the most exclusive corporate jobs no longer lag behind men.
"That means women earned 40 percent more than men in 2009," says Alexis Leondis of Bloomberg.
What's more, in 2009 female CEOs got raises averaging nearly 30 percent, while male CEOs took pay cuts.
Time for men to start getting Valentines Day gifts and dinners, for women to pick up the check on dates 1/2 the time (and not just offer to "get the tip"), and for women to buy men engagement jewelry, etc., and for us to split the bills 50/50!

-
Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
-
Contact:
Post
by Gawdzilla Sama » Thu May 13, 2010 1:11 pm
In Indiana, as of 1995, it was legal to pay a handicapped person 3/4 of the wage a "healthy" person received.
Ein Ubootsoldat wrote:“Ich melde mich ab. Grüssen Sie bitte meine Kameraden.”
-
ficklefiend
- Posts: 761
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Aberdeen
-
Contact:
Post
by ficklefiend » Thu May 13, 2010 1:36 pm
maiforpeace wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:
The census does not control for factors like education and experience, occupation, industry and whether they belong to a union, and the fact that women tend to cluster in lower-paying fields (teaching, psychology, secretarial). It does not factor in that the most-educated swath of women, for example, gravitates toward the teaching and nursing fields. Men with comparable education become business executives, scientists, doctors and lawyers — jobs that pay significantly more. And, that women are far more likely to take time off to start a family or work part-time while rearing one.
Men get paid more in those jobs that have been typically female dominated, like teaching and nursing. Why is that?
Coito ergo sum wrote:Feck wrote:Pappa wrote:
I saw that on the news. Binmen make £32,000 a year on average. I'm in the wrong job!
No BinMEN get up to 20'000 PA on top in Bonus !!!!!
What's a "binman?" And, shouldn't it be "binperson?"

I think that's a garbage collector. Looks like the UK needs to adopt our non-sexist term.

Haha, you have no idea, up here they call 'em scaffies.
Which is also gives us a pejorative term for anything, or anyone, a bit gross.
-
ficklefiend
- Posts: 761
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:38 pm
- Location: Aberdeen
-
Contact:
Post
by ficklefiend » Thu May 13, 2010 2:17 pm
Pappa wrote:colubridae wrote:There were once two racehorses called wun-wun and tu-tu
I read in the news
'Wun-wun won a race today tu-tu won one too'

<== colubridae
You're basic knowledge of Welsh might decipher a bit of this....
Mae dada da 'da dad. (Phon. "My dada da da dad") => My dad has got good cows.
Mae da da 'da dad. (Phon. "My da da da dad") => My dad has got good sweets.
Mae dy dei di du yn dda. (Phon. "My dur day dee dee un tha") => You're black tie is good.
My granny used to do one like this, it gets more frustrated as you go on-
Wool? Aye wool. A' wool? Aye a' wool. A' e ane wool? Aye a' e ane wool. A' e ane wool o yowe? A' e ane wool o yowe!
-
ED209
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:39 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by ED209 » Sat May 15, 2010 2:27 pm
Well, "a woman's work is never done" - so surely it's only right that they get paid less?

-
Trolldor
- Gargling with Nails
- Posts: 15878
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 5:57 am
-
Contact:
Post
by Trolldor » Sat May 15, 2010 2:44 pm
ED209 wrote:Well, "a woman's work is never done" - so surely it's only right that they get paid less?


"The fact is that far more crime and child abuse has been committed by zealots in the name of God, Jesus and Mohammed than has ever been committed in the name of Satan. Many people don't like that statement but few can argue with it."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests