Topic: OBAMA SIGNS FIRST BILL INTO LAW ~ EQUAL PAY
franshade's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:08 PM
Edited by franshade on Thu 01/29/09 12:08 PM
(portion of article)

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act effectively nullifies a 2007 Supreme Court decision that denied Ledbetter an opportunity for redress.

Ledbetter, 70, has said she did not learn about the sizable discrepancy in pay between her and her male co-workers until near the end of her 19-year career at a Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. plant in Gadsden, Ala. She sued, but the high court said in a 5-4 decision that she missed her chance to bring the action.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OBAMA?SITE=FLPAP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

My question is - does this now mean that our co-workers now are entitled to know what our wages are?


tanyaann's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:29 PM
I think it depends.

I think if you work at a company, where everyone is suppose to be paid the same wage for doing the same job. Then I don't see a problem, unless the company isn't doing that.

If you work for a company where your wage is based off of performance, than I don't think that it should be public, however, there does seem to need to be some sort of accountablity. Considering is it well known that even today women are still payed less than men.

franshade's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:31 PM

I think it depends.

I think if you work at a company, where everyone is suppose to be paid the same wage for doing the same job. Then I don't see a problem, unless the company isn't doing that.

If you work for a company where your wage is based off of performance, than I don't think that it should be public, however, there does seem to need to be some sort of accountablity. Considering is it well known that even today women are still payed less than men.


hiya sunshine, how's school???

Even if hired to do the same work (for example: pencil sharpener), should a new employee make the same wages as an employee that has been there say 5 years?

really curious

tanyaann's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:34 PM


I think it depends.

I think if you work at a company, where everyone is suppose to be paid the same wage for doing the same job. Then I don't see a problem, unless the company isn't doing that.

If you work for a company where your wage is based off of performance, than I don't think that it should be public, however, there does seem to need to be some sort of accountablity. Considering is it well known that even today women are still payed less than men.


hiya sunshine, how's school???

Even if hired to do the same work (for example: pencil sharpener), should a new employee make the same wages as an employee that has been there say 5 years?

really curious


Hey sexy mami,

Good. Getting stuff in order! I will find out about Harvard in mid-march *giddie*

I think that all companies are different, if they get cost of living raises then that should be reflected in pay.

I don't know if wages are always fair. But I will be sure to look into that when I am President! :wink: bigsmile

franshade's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:35 PM
you got my vote flowerforyou


johnlaxer22's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:40 PM
here comes the united communist states of america

tanyaann's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:40 PM

you got my vote flowerforyou




:wink:bigsmile

tanyaann's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:41 PM

here comes the united communist states of america


*rolls eyes*

You won't be complaining when you get your SS check or unemployment check or worker's comp... huh?

franshade's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:44 PM

here comes the united communist states of america


care to expand?

ontwowheels's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:50 PM
as a white male i do not like the idea. it does not mean other will be paid more. it means i will be paid less. he ( barry obama) also does not account for the average education between not only men and women but between races. ever hear of an asian complain about racial profiling? no? probably because they are statistically more educated, and there for get paid more.
if i wanted every one to get equal pay i would live in a socialist country.

tanyaann's photo
Thu 01/29/09 12:53 PM

as a white male i do not like the idea. it does not mean other will be paid more. it means i will be paid less. he ( barry obama) also does not account for the average education between not only men and women but between races. ever hear of an asian complain about racial profiling? no? probably because they are statistically more educated, and there for get paid more.
if i wanted every one to get equal pay i would live in a socialist country.


It isn't about equal pay, but getting paid what you deserve. If you worked just as long and hard as another individual, wouldn't you want to be paid the same?

hellkitten54's photo
Thu 01/29/09 02:42 PM

as a white male i do not like the idea. it does not mean other will be paid more. it means i will be paid less. he ( barry obama) also does not account for the average education between not only men and women but between races. ever hear of an asian complain about racial profiling? no? probably because they are statistically more educated, and there for get paid more.
if i wanted every one to get equal pay i would live in a socialist country.


whoa

Educate yourself on Lilly Ledbetter, the person that fought for this law to be passed and then come reply.

no photo
Thu 01/29/09 02:42 PM
Edited by Bushidobillyclub on Thu 01/29/09 02:46 PM
Yes this is important.

Yes measures like this if not enforced properly can have negative effects on a supposedly free market.

I think that if a women can document her experience and performance as being equal to a particular male counter part she should be able to negotiate a pay raise to at least that salary. (performance and experience being important but so is attitude, if she has a better attitude she should get paid more)

If denied then it would be the companies responsibility to provide a clear and reasonable reason why.




franshade's photo
Thu 01/29/09 02:49 PM

Yes this is important.

Yes measures like this if not enforced properly can have negative effects on a supposedly free market.

I think that if a women can document her experience and performance as being equal to a particular male counter part she should be able to negotiate a pay raise to at least that salary.

If denied then it would be the companies responsibility to provide a clear and reasonable reason why.


this is where my ignorance comes to light.

why do women have to document her experience and performance? do we just take a man's word as his experience and performance?

as simple as I see things (in my own little world) a person should be compensated for their job performance, contributions, experience, education (etc) to their jobs/careers

but why should I if recently employed expect to make the same as another who has seniority (regardless of sex/gender)?

is this making my personal income information now available public viewing?