Black Womenâs Equal Pay DayÂ falls on August 3 this year. Thatâs the day when, starting on January 1, 2020, Black women have finally been paid what white men were paid in 2020Â alone.
Equal Pay Day, the day observing this marker for women overall in the U.S., fell on March 24 this year. Latina Equal Pay Day wonât come until October.
This means Black women who work full-time all year have to work an extra 214 daysâmore than seven months longer than white non-Hispanic menâto earn the same amount of money. Obviously, theyâre not getting a seven-month discount on their rent and groceries.
It takes us this long to get to Black Womenâs Equal Pay Day because Black women make just 63 cents for every dollar paid to white men, a gross disparity that will cost the average Black woman more than $24,000 a year and more than $960,000 in her lifetime. Itâs a disparity that isnât going away anytime soon: At the rate this pay gap has closed over the past 30 years, Black women wonât be getting equal pay until the year 2130.
âIt also has ripple effects that mean Black women miss key opportunities throughout their lifetimes to build wealth and future economic security for themselves and their families,â the National Women’s Law Center’s Jasmine Tucker reports. âThe wage gap means many cannot save enough to afford a down payment on a home, cannot afford to pay for their own or a childâs higher education, cannot start a business or save for retirement. It is no surprise, then, that white families have eight times the wealth of Black families or that single Black women own $200 in wealth for every $28,900 single white men own.â
During the pandemic, Black women have been hit especially hard by unemployment. âNearly one in five Black women (18.3%) lost their jobs between February 2020 and April 2020, compared with 13.2% of white men,â the Economic Policy Institute’s Valerie Wilson writes. âAs of June 2021, Black womenâs employment was still 5.1 percentage points below February 2020 levels, while white men were down 3.7 percentage points.â
At the same time, Black women in jobs critically important to getting the nation through the pandemic have continued to be paid less than their white male counterparts, from physicians to nurses to teachers to cashiers. Companies can make a difference to the Black women who work for them by prioritizing equity. Unions help close pay gaps for their members. Every data point we have shows that the pay gap is structural, and that means it requires government action to correct on a meaningful scale.
Even if pay inequality were magically eradicated, Black people would still face systemic effects of the wealth inequality thatâs been developed over generations of racist policy. But it would be a start.
Tucker offers a list of policies that would help close the gap: âsupport policies that expand and strengthen federal and state unemployment insurance programs; expand access to comprehensive health coverage, including reproductive care;Â bolster equal pay laws; increase the wages of women in low-paid jobs by raising the minimum wage; protect workersâ ability to join unions and collectively bargain; expand the availability of high-quality, affordable child care; and provide paid family and medical leave.â These moves would help a great many workers beyond Black women, of course, but eliminating avenues for employers to exploitÂ and oppress workersÂ especially helps the workers who are now most oftenÂ exploited and oppressed.
This blog originally appeared at DailyKos on August 3, 2021. Reprinted with permission.
About the author: Laura ClawsonÂ has been a Daily Kos contributing editor since December 2006 and a full-time staff since 2011, currently acting as assistant managing editor.
The path toward economic recovery in the U.S. has become sharply divided, with wealthier Americans earning and saving at record levels while the poorest struggle to pay their bills and put food on the table.
The result is a splintered economic picture characterized by high highs â the stock market has hit record levels â and incongruous low lows: Nearly 30 million Americans are receiving unemployment benefits, and the jobless rate stands at 8.4 percent. And that dichotomy, economists fear, could obscure the need for an additional economic stimulus that most say is sorely needed.
The trend is on track to exacerbate dramatic wealth and income gaps in the U.S., where divides are already wider than any other nation in the G-7, a group of major developed countries. Spiraling inequality can also contribute to political and financial instability, fuel social unrest and extend any economic recession.
The growing divide could also have damaging implications for President Donald Trump’s reelection bid. Economic downturns historically have been harmful if not fatal for incumbent presidents, and Trump’s base of working-class, blue-collar voters in the Midwest are among the demographics hurting the most. The White House has worked to highlight a rapid economic recovery as a primary reason to reelect the president, but his support on the issue is slipping: Nearly 3 in 5 people say the economy is on the wrong track, a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found.
Democrats are now seizing on what they see as an opportunity to hit the president on what had been one of his strongest reelection arguments.
“The economic inequities that began before the downturn have only worsened under this failed presidency,” Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden said Friday. “No one thought they’d lose their job for good or see small businesses shut down en masse. But that kind of recovery requires leadership â leadership we didn’t have, and still don’t have.”
Recent economic data and surveys have laid bare the growing divide. Americans saved a stunning $3.2 trillion in July, the same month that more than 1 in 7 households with children told the U.S. Census Bureau they sometimes or often didnât have enough food. More than a quarter of adults surveyed have reported paying down debt faster than usual, according to aÂ new AP-NORC poll, while the same proportion said they have been unable to make rent or mortgage payments or pay a bill.
A historic House vote on marijuana legalization will take place later this month. We break down why Democrats are voting on the bill despite the fact that it’ll be dead upon arrival in the Senate.
And while the employment rate for high-wage workers has almost entirely recovered â by mid-July it was down just 1 percent from January â it remains down 15.4 percent for low-wage workers, according to Harvardâs Opportunity Insights economic tracker.
âWhat thatâs created is this tale of two recessions,â said Beth Akers, a labor economist with the Manhattan Institute who worked on the Council of Economic Advisers under President George W. Bush. âThere are so obviously complete communities that have been almost entirely unscathed by Covid, while others are entirely devastated.â
Trump and his allies have seized on the strength of the stock market and positive growth in areas like manufacturing and retail sales as evidence of what they have been calling a “V-shaped recovery”: a sharp drop-off followed by rapid growth.
Some economists have begun to refer to the recovery as “K-shaped,” because while some households and communities have mostly recovered, others are continuing to struggle â or even seeing their situation deteriorate further.
âIf you just look at the top of the K, itâs a V â but you canât just look at whatâs above water,â said Claudia Sahm, director of macroeconomic policy at the Washington Center for Equitable Growth. âThere could be a whole iceberg underneath it that youâre going to plow into.â
The burden is falling heavily on the poorest Americans, who are more likely to be out of work and less likely to have savings to lean on to weather the crisis. While recessions are always hardest on the poor, the coronavirus downturn has amplified those effects because shutdowns and widespread closures have wiped out low-wage jobs in industries like leisure and hospitality.
Highly touted gains in the stock market, meanwhile, help only the wealthiest 10 percent or so of households, as most others own little or no stock.
The disconnect between the stock market and the broader economy has been stark. On the same day in late August that MGM Resorts announced it would be laying off a quarter of its workforce, throwing some 18,000 workers into unemployment, its stock price jumped more than 6 percent, reaching its highest closing price since the start of March.
âThe haves and the have-nots, thereâs always been a distinction,â Sahm said. But now, she added, âwe are widening this in a way I donât think people have really wrapped their head around.â
Without further stimulus, the situation appears poised to get worse. Economic growth until now had been led by increasing levels of consumer spending, buoyed by stimulus checks and enhanced unemployment benefits that gave many people, including jobless workers, more money to spend.
Low-income consumers have led the way, and they spent slightly more in August than they did in January, according to the Opportunity Insights tracker â even as middle- and high-income consumers are still spending less.
But those low-income consumers were also the most dependent on the extra $600 per week in boosted unemployment benefits, which expired in July. Since that lapsed â and since Congress appears unlikely to extend it any time soon, if at all â âweâre likely to see other macroeconomic numbers really fall off a cliff in the coming weeks,â Akers said.
The expected drop in spending, paired with the expiration of economic relief initiatives like the Paycheck Protection Program, could also spell trouble for businesses in the coming months. Many economists expect a wave of bankruptcies and business closures in the fall, contributing to further layoffs.
In that sector, too, owners are feeling disparate impacts. More than 1 in 5 small business owners reported that sales are still 50 percent or less than where they were before the pandemic, according to a recent survey from the National Federation of Independent Business, and the same proportion say they will need to close their doors if current economic conditions do not improve within six months.
At the same time, however, half said they are nearly back to where they were before, and approximately 1 in 7 owners say they are doing better now than they were before the pandemic, the survey showed.
Those diverging narratives could be understating the need for further stimulus by smoothing over some of the deeper weaknesses in the labor market and the economy, experts say.
âThis is a case where the averages tell a different story than the underlying data itself,â said Peter Atwater, an adjunct economics professor at William & Mary.
While Republicans appear to be embracing the idea of further âtargetedâ aid, they are also touting what Trump has called a ârocket-shipâ economic recovery and emphasizing record-breaking growth while downplaying the record-breaking losses that preceded it.
âThereâs no question the recovery has beat expectations,â said Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), the top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, this week on a press call with reporters.
âPeople are in these bubbles,â Atwater said. âAnd if people arenât leaving their homes, are not really getting out, itâs unlikely that theyâre seeing the magnitude of the downside of this K-shaped recovery.â
ThisÂ articleÂ originally appeared at Politico on September 7, 2020. Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Megan Cassella is a trade reporter for POLITICO Pro. Before joining the trade team in June 2016, Megan worked for Reuters based out of Washington, covering the economy, domestic politics and the 2016 presidential campaign. It was in that role that she first began covering trade, including Donald Trumpâs rise as the populist candidate vowing to renegotiate NAFTA and Hillary Clintonâs careful sidestep of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
A D.C.-area native, Megan headed south for a few years to earn her bachelorâs degree in business journalism and international politics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Now settled back inside the Beltway, Meganâs on the hunt for the cityâs best Carolina BBQ â and still rooting for the Heels.
The House on Wednesday voted 242-187 for a bill that would strengthen protections for female workers and help close the gender wage gap. The vote comes as Republicans are trumpeting themselves as the champions of womenâs economic mobility â though only seven of them voted for the bill.
Iterations of this legislation have been debated by lawmakers for decades but have never actually been able to pass. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), seeks to boost womenâs pay by prohibiting employers from seeking job applicantsâ salary histories and preventing them from retaliating against workers for disclosing their wages. It also would require the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to collect wage data based on sex, race, and national origin to better determine whether employers are responsible for discriminatory practices. The House passed the bill on Wednesday despite Republicansâ opposition, but it now faces an uncertain future in the GOP-controlled Senate.
The House Education and Labor Committee voted to advance the legislation earlier this week. Every single Republican opposed moving the bill out of committee, with many saying the focus should instead be on providing more job opportunities for women.
Republicans often like to point to data showing that women gained 58 percent of new, private-sector jobs in 2018. Trump touted the figure in his State of the Union address in February, and Republicans in the Education and Labor Committee again brought it up when discussing the Paycheck and Fairness Act.
But many of the jobs gained by women are part time, and nearly 80 percent of them fell into just four categories: education and health services, professional and business services, leisure and hospitality, and manufacturing. In three of those industries, women make less than 80 cents for every dollar a man earns, or worse than the average national wage gap, according to a 2018 analysis by the Center for American Progress analysis. (Editorâs Note: ThinkProgress is an editorially independent newsroom housed at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.)
Jocelyn Frye, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress who focuses on work-family balance, pay equity, and womenâs leadership, said, âItâs not to discount that women have received jobs and obviously want jobs but there is a disconnect. Itâs not responsive to the question [of pay inequality]. The fact that you gave the jobs doesnât change the fact that the jobs are underpaying women.â
Republicans, meanwhile, have been looking for ways to appeal to greater numbers of women voters, particularly since their support among women plummeted in the 2018 midterm elections.
In November, 59 percent of women voted for Democrats in the congressional elections, according to exit poll data. Only 40 percent of women voted for Republicans. There was no measurement for how nonbinary people voted across race or educational attainment. Black and Latina women overwhelmingly voted for Democratic candidates.
Although there was a roughly even split for how white women voted, 59 percent of college-educated white women and 56 percent of white voters ages 18 to 29 voted for Democrats.Â Experts say these shifts likely represent a long-term trend.
Kelly Dittmar of the Center for American Women and Politics, part of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University, said the shift likely isnât about Trump alone, but about the broader Republican Party.
âMy hypothesis at this moment is that it is actually a trend because there were signs of this trend before Donald Trump, itâs just that you saw it through an acceleration I think â the departure of these women,â Dittmar said. âI think youâll continue to see it because these women who are particularly upset with how the party has dealt with Donald Trump, it certainly leaves a taste in their mouth about the party overall.â
She added, âIf you put these women on a scale when it comes to immigration or guns or the environment, their positions on these issues are just not aligned with the current agenda and leadership in the Republican Party.â
Democratic pollster Celinda LakeÂ said that when looking at women who vote in the general election, college-educated and suburban women are identifying as more independent and Democratic. She said three major waves encapsulate that movement.
The Republican Partyâs position on social issues â including birth control, Title IX, and sexual harassment and violence â led to some women moving away from the Republican Party in 2016. The second wave emerged as voters reacted to Trumpâs racist and sexist behavior, as well as how he governs.
âThe third wave, which is more recent, is a sense that the country is going in the wrong direction, that the priorities are wrong, that we are not dealing with everything from health care to climate change,â Lake said.
Lake said that for female voters, including Republican women, equal pay is high on the list of concerns, along with domestic violence programs. The reauthorization and expansion of the Violence Against Women Act is on the House agenda this session. But Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) is the only Republican in the House who is cosponsoring the bill and the only Republican who has shown support for the bill by attending its introduction.
âThereâs a very high correlation between concerns about sexual harassment and concerns about domestic violence and concerns about equal pay.â Lake said. âAnd equal pay is still the most salient of the three with women overall. And itâs particularly salient with Republican women who are very adamant about equal pay and that it remains a problem.â
Dittmar said that across gender, voters are concerned about economic stability and the well-being of their families. But they are divided over who is responsible. She explained that college-educated women who identify as Democrats tend to say the government plays a role but Republicans tend to say itâs up to businesses to address equal pay.
âBroadly I think there is pretty high popularity for wanting to address equal pay but itâs in the how where you see the disparity both among legislators as well as the public,â she said.
Ariane Hegewisch, program director of employment and earnings for the Institute for Womenâs Policy Research, said these measures are necessary to ensure workplace fairness.
âWhat the Equal Pay Act recognizes and what the Paycheck Fairness Act is trying to update 50 years on to more current circumstances is that there is discrimination in the labor market and if you just rely on what people are paid now, you are going to pick up discrimination and import it into your organization,â she said. âYou have to pay people the same if they do the same job and have similar education, experience and performance. You can qualify their personal performance but it has to be fact based.â
According to the Institute for Womenâs Policy Research, it will take until 2059 for women to reach pay parity if change continues at theÂ current pace. Black women would have to wait until 2119 for equal pay, and Latina women until 2224.
âAfter what I would call a wave election in 2018 where women were elected to historic numbers in Congress, people have very high expectations of what they are going to get from lawmakers and it is not acceptable simply to say I support equal pay but I have nothing to show for it,â said Frye.
This article was originally published at ThinkProgress on March 27, 2019. Reprinted with permission.Â
About the Author: Casey Quinlan is a policy reporter at ThinkProgress covering gender and sexuality. Their work has also been published in The Establishment, Bustle, Glamour, The Guardian, and In These Times.
Today is Latina Equal Pay Day, the day in the year when Latina pay catches up to that of white, non-Hispanic men. That means Latinas work nearly 23 months to make what white, non-Hispanic men earn in one year.
More than 50 years after the passage of the Equal Pay Act, women still get paid less for the same work. But women of colorâLatinas especiallyâexperience the widest wage gap for the same jobs.
While itâs shameful that women are still fighting for equal pay, there are steps we can take to close the gap. The best way is to join a union. Through union contracts, women have closed the wage gap and received higher pay and better benefits. In fact,Â union women earn $231 more a weekÂ than women who donât have a union voice.
When women are represented by unions and negotiate together, they have the power to create a better life.
Check out some facts below about Latina Equal Pay Day, and learn more fromÂ AFL-CIOÂ Secretary-Treasurer Liz ShulerÂ here.
Latinas get paid only 53 cents to every dollar a white, non-Hispanic man makesâthe largest gap in the nation.
Latinas must work 23 months to earn what a white man does in 12 months.
The average weekly earnings for Latinas is $621, compared to the $815 that white, non-Hispanic women bring home every week.
Latinas in unions earn 48% more.
This blog was originally published by the AFL-CIO on November 1, 2018. Reprinted with permission.Â
Former President Obama intended to fight pay discrimination with a rule requiring businesses to track how much they pay different groups of workers. You know the next part, right? Of course you do. Donald Trump isÂ blocking the rule from going into effectÂ as scheduled next spring because itâs just too hard for businesses to report how much they pay their workers.
âItâs enormously burdensome,â said Neomi Rao, administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which analyzes the cost of federal rules and regulations. âWe donât believe it would actually help us gather information about wage and employment discrimination.”
Which part of that do you think is more importantâthat itâs burdensome or that they donât believe it would help gather information? Or the unstated third reason that Donald Trump and his underlings donât want to hold businesses accountable for discrimination anyway. This burden, by the way, amounts to putting extra information on a form that businesses already fill out. That information about how much women vs. men are paid, or workers of color vs. white workers seems like it would be helpful to uncovering discrimination. The Obama administration certainly thought so:
âWeâd learn about a pay-discrimination problem because someone saw a piece of paper left on a copy machine or someone was complaining about their salary to co-workers,â leading others to realize they were being underpaid, said Jenny Yang, who was chairwoman of the EEOC when the rules were drafted, at NYU School of Lawâs Annual Conference on Labor in June.
âHaving pay data in summary form will also help us identify patterns that may warrant further investigation,â Ms. Yang said.
Self-proclaimed equal pay champion Ivanka Trump is right on board with the messaging against this effort to promote equal pay, by the way.
This blog was originally published at DailyKos Labor on August 30, 2017. Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Laura ClawsonÂ is labor editor at Daily Kos.
June 10th is the 54th anniversary of the passage of the Equal Pay Act, the 1963 law that prohibits employers from paying men and women different wages for the same work solely based on sex. The Equal Pay Actâs passage is an important example of the labor movementâs long history of partnering with progressive womenâs organizations to advocate for equal pay for women. Indeed,Â Esther Petersonâone of the labor movementâs greatest sheroesâwas instrumental in the enactment of this landmark legislation.
Pay equity and transparency are bread and butter issues for working women; when they come together to negotiate collectively for fair wages and important benefits, like access to health insurance and paid leave, they can better support their families. (Indeed, women in unions experienceÂ a smaller wage gap than women without a union voice).
Â Since the passage of the EPA, the gender wage gap has narrowed, but it persists. Women overall typically are paid 80 cents for every dollar paid to their male counterparts, and that number hasÂ barely changedÂ in the past 10 years. And the gap is even larger when you compare the earnings ofÂ women of colorÂ to white men.
Â Clearly, we still have much to do to ensure pay equity, and thereâs been some progress, thanks to tireless working women and their allies across the country. For instance, in the past two years, more thanÂ half the states have introduced or passed their own remediesÂ to increase pay transparency, strengthen employer accountability and empower working people to take action against pay discrimination. But stronger protection from pay discrimination shouldnât depend on where you happen to live or where you work. Working women deserve a national solution.
Â Thatâs why the AFL-CIO, the National Womenâs Law Center and countless other organizations support theÂ Paycheck Fairness Act, part of aÂ comprehensive womenâs economic agenda. TheÂ PFA would strengthen the EPA by: protecting employees from retaliation for discussing pay; limiting the ability of employers to claim pay differences are based on âfactors other than sexâ; prohibiting employers from relying on a prospective employeeâs wage history in determining compensation; strengthening individual and collective remedies against employers who discriminate; and increasing the data collection and enforcement capacity of key federal agencies.
Â We need strong policy solutions like the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Raise the Wage Act to help close the gender wage gap. Working women and the families who depend on them canât afford to wait another 54 years.
This blog was originally published at AFLCIO.org on June 10, 2017. Reprinted with permission.
About the Authors:Â Fatima Goss Graves is the senior vice president for program and president-elect at the National Womenâs Law Center. In her current role, she leads the centerâs broad agenda to eliminate barriers in employment, education, health care and reproductive rights and lift women and families out of poverty. Prior to joining the center,, she worked in private practice and clerked for the Honorable Diane P. Wood on the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Liz Shuler is secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO. The second-highest position in the labor movement, Shuler serves as the chief financial officer of the federation and oversees operations. Shuler is the first woman elected as the federationâs secretary-treasurer, holding office since 2009.
Nearly 60 percent of women would earn more if working women were paid the same as men the same age doing similar work.
The poverty rate for working women would be cut in half; the poverty rate for working single mothers would fall by nearly half.
The US Economy would produce an extra $447.6 billion, if women received equal pay.
Like a ârising tide,â lifting these women lifts the households that depend upon their earnings, and boosts the economy. An economy that works for women, then, works for American families, too, bringing us closer to an economy that works for all. To that end EPI has introduced the âWomenâs Economic Agenda,â a 12-point policy agenda that will âgive low- and moderate-wage workers more economic leverage, change the rules so that a growing economy benefits hardworking Americans, and maximize womenâs economic security.â
The benefits for women are clear. As I wrote in, âWe Must Fight Poverty With Justice,â itâs no coincidence that womenâs risk of poverty jumps drastically between the ages ofÂ 25 and 34, when their poverty rate is 6.9 times higher than menâs, or that their poverty risk doesnât begin to come down until age 40. Women are at a higher risk of poverty during their peak reproductive years, when they begin juggling the responsibilities of work and family, and lose out on pay thatâs already less than what men earn.
However, the benefits of the agenda arenât exclusive to women. In fact, none of its 12 points are applied exclusively to women. Men, women, and children would benefit from increased wages, guaranteed family leave and paid sick leave, accessible child care, and all of the other agenda items. When the economy works for women on these 12 issues, itâs more likely to work for us all.
This blog was originally posted on Our Future on November 18, 2015. Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Terrance Heath is the Online Producer at Campaign for Americaâs Future. He has consulted on blogging and social media consultant for a number of organizations and agencies. He is a prominent activist on LGBT and HIV/AIDS issues.
In a new note about their research, Federal Reserve Bank of New York economists Stefania Albanesi, Claudia Olivetti, and Maria Prados find that if a companyâs value drops by 1 percent, female executivesâ pay will drop by 63 percent, while male executives only see a 33 percent decline. On the other hand, if value goes up by 1 percent men will get a 44 percent boost but women will only get a 13 percent increase.
This leads to cumulative losses for women but gains for men. The economists looked at pay for the top five executives in public companies â CEO, vice chair, president, CFO, and chief operating officer â in the Standard and Poorâs ExecutComp database between 1992 and 2005. Over that time, womenâs pay dropped 16 percent while menâs rose 15 percent. If a companyâs value increases by $1 million, male executives will net $17,150 more in compensation but women will only get $1,670. âSo, overall,â they write, âchanges in firm performance penalize female executives while they favor male executives.â
There is still a tiny number of female executives to begin with. They made up just 3.2 percent of the people in the roles examined by the New York Fed economists, while they account for 4.6 percent of CEOs at S&P 500 companies andÂ a quarter of executive and senior officers. But even so, they are still paid less than their male peers. The New York Fed research found that female executivesâ total compensation was just 82 percent of menâs. The highest-paid female executives at S&P 500 companies made 18 percent lessÂ than male ones in 2013, and female CEOs made less than 80 percent of what male ones made.
Several prominent female executives have recently demonstrated the severity of the pay gap at the top. Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer was paid less in her few years than the man who had the job before her and ended up fired. Mary Barra, the first female CEO of General Motors, got a pay package for her first year that was less than half of what the man who had the job before her made, although her long-term compensation package will be higher. The value of that package, of course, will depend on the companyâs value over time.
But part of the disparity is the way that female executives get paid in the first place. In their research, the New York Fed economists found that womenâs compensation is made up of less incentive pay than menâs, which accounts for 93 percent of the overall gender pay gap among them. The biggest gap is in bonuses: female executives get bonuses that amount to just 71 percent of male executivesâ. But they also get less in stock options and grants, getting just 84 percent and 87 percent, respectively, of what men get. The gap in stock options alone explains 41 percent in the overall gender gap.
While thereâs a gender wage gap at the very top of the economy, itâs part of a problem that follows women inÂ virtually every job. They get lower salaries right out of college and will make less than men at every education level. While many factors go into the gender wage gap, womenâs career interruptions to care for children can only explain about 10 percent of it and the most ambitious women will still make less.
This blog originally appeared at ThinkProgress.org on August 26, 2015. Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Bryce Covert is the Economic Policy Editor for ThinkProgress. She was previously editor of the Roosevelt Instituteâs Next New Deal blog and a senior communications officer. She is also a contributor for The Nation and was previously a contributor for ForbesWoman. Her writing has appeared on The New York Times, The New York Daily News, The Nation, The Atlantic, The American Prospect, and others. She is also a board member of WAM!NYC, the New York Chapter of Women, Action & the Media.
Every year, each of the data sets found men earned more than women; the unadjusted pay gap ranged from $10,243 to $11,306 in one survey and from $9,163 to $9,961 in the other.There was a gap for hospital nurses, $3,783, and an even bigger one, $7,678, for nurses in outpatient settings.
Men out-earned women in every specialty except orthopedics, with the gap ranging from $3,792 in chronic care to $17,290 for nurse anesthetists.
Some of the usual possible explanations for how it’s totally not sexism apply, except that those explanations themselves typically involve some form of sexism, if not direct wage discrimination. So, yes, maybe women are more likely to work part-time (because they’re doing the work of caring for families that men don’t bother with).But given pay differentials this pervasive within one occupation (so we know it’s not that women make less because men are on Wall Street and women are secretaries) and across specialties within that occupation, a few of the “it’s not sexism because it’s really about women’s choices, which I am pretending are not constrained by sexism” excuses for the gender pay gap are eliminated. Which makes it just one more big glaring data point on the mile-long list of data points showing that women are systematically underpaid (or men are systematically overpaid) throughout the American economy.
This blog originally appeared on dailykos.com on March 24, 2015. Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Laura Clawson is Daily Kos contributing editor since December 2006. Labor editor since 2011. Laura at Daily Kos
âProgress in closing the gender wage gap has stalled during the most recent decade. The wage gap is still at the same level as it was in 2002,â said Heidi Hartmann, president ofÂ IWPR. âIf the five-decade trend is projected forward, it will take almost another five decadesâuntilÂ 2058âfor women to reach pay equity. The majority of todayâs working women will be well past the ends of their working lives.â
IWPR released aÂ new fact sheetÂ that tracks the pay gap from 1960 to todayÂ and analyzes changes during the past year by gender, race and ethnicity.
âWhile there is no silver bullet forÂ closingÂ the gender wage gap,â said Ariane Hegewisch, a study director at IWPR and author of the fact sheet, âstrengthened enforcement of our EEO laws, a higher minimum wage and workâfamily benefits would go a significant way toward ensuring that working women are able to support their families.â
This article was originally printed on AFL-CIO on September 20, 2013. Â Reprinted with permission.
About the Author: Jackie TortoraÂ isÂ the blog editor and social media manager at the AFL-CIO.
Share this post
Subscribe For Updates
Find an Employment Attorney
The Workplace Fairness Attorney Directory features lawyers from across the United States who primarily represent workers in employment cases. Please note that Workplace Fairness does not operate a lawyer referral service and does not provide legal advice, and that Workplace Fairness is not responsible for any advice that you receive from anyone, attorney or non-attorney, you may contact from this site.
Workplace Fairness is a non-profit organization working to preserve and promote employee rights. This site provides comprehensive information about job rights and employment issues nationally and in all 50 states. It is for workers, employers, advocates, policymakers, journalists, and anyone else who wants to understand, protect, and strengthen workersâ rights. More about Workplace Fairness