homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools
Thread closed  Thread closed


Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: A 2012 US election thread (Page 54)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  ...  71  72  73 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: A 2012 US election thread
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898

 - Posted      Profile for New Yorker   Email New Yorker   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Obama has also steadfastly refused to put forward a vision of what he wants to do and campaign on that.

It's worse than that. Every budget he has sent to Congress has been rejected almost unanimously (which, obviously, includes most of his own party). When he does put forward a vision NO ONE wants it!

As far as women and binders: why are women paid less than men in Obama's White House? Why do they talk about it being a hostile work environment?

Also, on a more important note, I, too, love the Capitol Steps!

Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
As far as women and binders: why are women paid less than men in Obama's White House? Why do they talk about it being a hostile work environment?

Don't you get tired of people asking for proof?

Proof?

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
It seems to have been the case in 2009. I'm not sure whether anything has changed since then.

Women at the White House, at the time the analysis was done, made 89 cents for every dollar the men made -- better than the national average, but not good enough.

On the other hand, there's no indication that the pay differential is a result of women being paid less for the same job as men. It could be, of course, but there's no evidence either way. The evidence shows that women who work for the White House are more likely to have lower paying jobs, like administrative assistant or receptionist, and men are more likely to have higher paying jobs, like policy analysts.

It's also not clear to me how much control Obama has over pay for White House staff. Surely he's not setting the salary for every receptionist, housekeeper, or cook?

I'd like to see the same analysis done for the Bush White House.

And I'd like to know what Mr. Romney pays his household staff.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I'd like to know if anyone's checked the immigration status of Romney's household staff...

Not that I wish anything bad (like La Migra [Paranoid] (Immigration dept.)) on them. But a lot of past politicians turned out to have undocumented household help.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765

 - Posted      Profile for Dave W.   Email Dave W.   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I suspect Romney and his staff have been pretty careful about who they hire since this 2006 article in The Boston Globe: Illegal immigrants toiled for governor.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
It's even more puzzling, then, that he's not more careful about apparently contradicting himself about taxation, family planning, and abortion.

Do voters care more about household help lacking green cards than they care about having no readily discernible positions on these other isses? Or on his stance on the Dream Act, which he's indicated that both he'd repeal and support?

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898

 - Posted      Profile for New Yorker   Email New Yorker   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
I'd like to see the same analysis done for the Bush White House.

That would be interesting, but irrelevant. Obama was presenting himself as the champion of equal pay in the last debate. It's his payroll that should be interested.

On another note: anyone see the two at the Al Smith dinner? Both Obama and Romney were pretty good.

Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
On the other hand, there's no indication that the pay differential is a result of women being paid less for the same job as men.

I just want to point out what an idiotic notion this is. In my field, it is routine for the same person to be offered an equivalent job for half as much at one company as at another. Worse, the amount that you are offered at a given company is usually based on what you made at your last job, so it is quite possible for the same job to have a huge range of possible salaries without any reference to gender.

The problem I have with "equal pay for equal work" is that it makes no sense, gvien how people are actually paid. Should there be a national registry of salaries for work, so that this nonsensical notion can be put into law? It may sound good when pandering to "the women vote," but it just doesn't make any sense on examination. Or so ISTM.

--Tom Clune

[ 19. October 2012, 13:43: Message edited by: tclune ]

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I think the point is that in the same company men and women should not be receiving different salaries for doing the same work. As used to routinely be the case.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
On another note: anyone see the two at the Al Smith dinner? Both Obama and Romney were pretty good.

I thought Romney got in a couple of good ones, but some other ones were edgy bordering on beyond-the-pale insulting. And his screamingly obvious pandering to the RCC concerning abortion and birth control were painful. Obama relied far too heavily on blowing-his-own-horn "jokes" that weren't all that funny.

I thought McCain's performance 4 years ago was masterful and blew both of last night's monologues out of the water (as well as Obama's 4 years ago). So maybe I was holding them up to too high of a standard.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I think the point is that in the same company men and women should not be receiving different salaries for doing the same work. As used to routinely be the case.

The first job offer I got when I left college was at an engineering company. They offered me $10,000. Given that the only writers I knew at the time were journalists, and given what journalists made, that wasn't awful. I took it.

And after a year, because of my stellar performance, I was offered a 20% raise. And shortly after that, I learned that the man who had held the position before I was hired had been making $30,000.

That sort of pay disparity was common at the time. Here's info on gender-based pay disparity in the US, for anyone who is interested.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I think the point is that in the same company men and women should not be receiving different salaries for doing the same work. As used to routinely be the case.

Did you read my post? Two men are offered wildly different salaries for what amounts to the same job at companies where I work. The primary determinant of what you make is what you made at your last job.

FWIW, this is why I did consulting work for a couple of years -- consultants aren't paid that way. My salary literally doubled when I returned to regular employment because of how I could present my previous pay rate while consulting. But a good friend of mine who was hired to do exactly the same job at the same company made literally half of what I was making.

So what was the job "worth?" Add in "comparable work" (whatever that means), and you are really talking through your ass.

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
On the other hand, there's no indication that the pay differential is a result of women being paid less for the same job as men.

I just want to point out what an idiotic notion this is. In my field, it is routine for the same person to be offered an equivalent job for half as much at one company as at another. Worse, the amount that you are offered at a given company is usually based on what you made at your last job, so it is quite possible for the same job to have a huge range of possible salaries without any reference to gender.

The problem I have with "equal pay for equal work" is that it makes no sense, gvien how people are actually paid. Should there be a national registry of salaries for work, so that this nonsensical notion can be put into law? It may sound good when pandering to "the women vote," but it just doesn't make any sense on examination. Or so ISTM.

--Tom Clune

It seems odd to me for your pay to be pegged to what your last job paid, although I recognize that it often happesn due to competition. The end result, though, is you end up disincentivizing company loyalty-- someone who has been with the company for many years will make less because they have no "old salary" to negotiate an increase, someone who hops from company to company is able to leverage higher & higher pay.

But the real root of your concern really is about feasibility, not morality. The fact that something is hard to accomplish or demonstrate (fairness in pay grades) says nothing whatsoever about whether or not is a good and worthy goal.

Pay equity is, IMHO, an unquestionably good and worthy goal. It also happens to be one that is difficult to measure, and thus to legislate. One can debate whether or not the Lily Ledbetter Act effectively measures and thus effectively enforces pay equity. But that doesn't alter the worthiness of the goal.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Pay equity is, IMHO, an unquestionably good and worthy goal.

No, it is a meaningless concept. Jobs don't have an intrinsic value. Consider, for example, all those scummy CEOs who hire "executive pay consultants" to show that they are underpaid. This stuff is complete nonsense. They get paid whatever they can squeeze out of the board of directors. Meanwhile, the guy who sweeps the floor gets paid whatever the minimum wage is. It has to do with leverage, not merit.

Pay is not tied to anything at all beyond that AFAICS. Merit in the workplace is a chimera, pure and simple. If you think you can use the political system to squeeze more money for yourself out of the system, knock yourself out. But don't expect me to pretend that there is any merit in what you are doing. It is just another power play.

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Pay equity is, IMHO, an unquestionably good and worthy goal.

No, it is a meaningless concept. Jobs don't have an intrinsic value. Consider, for example, all those scummy CEOs who hire "executive pay consultants" to show that they are underpaid. This stuff is complete nonsense. They get paid whatever they can squeeze out of the board of directors. Meanwhile, the guy who sweeps the floor gets paid whatever the minimum wage is. It has to do with leverage, not merit.

Pay is not tied to anything at all beyond that AFAICS. Merit in the workplace is a chimera, pure and simple. If you think you can use the political system to squeeze more money for yourself out of the system, knock yourself out. But don't expect me to pretend that there is any merit in what you are doing. It is just another power play.

--Tom Clune

Pardon my hubris, but sounds like you didn't read my post other than the one line you wanted to pounce on. Because what you have said here simply illustrates the same point I was making-- that your argument is not re: the worthiness of the goal but rather the difficulty of enforcement.

Again, yes, I agree that pay equity is difficult to measure. It may even be impossible to measure. Difficulty in measurement makes it difficult to legislate, possibly impossible. But again, that doesn't change the worthiness of the goal.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Pardon my hubris, but sounds like you didn't read my post other than the one line you wanted to pounce on. Because what you have said here simply illustrates the same point I was making-- that your argument is not re: the worthiness of the goal but rather the difficulty of enforcement.

No, I am not saying that it is difficult to measure. I am saying that it is a meaningless concept. "Green ideas" aren't difficult to measure -- they are nonsense.

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I think the point is that in the same company men and women should not be receiving different salaries for doing the same work. As used to routinely be the case.

quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Did you read my post? Two men are offered wildly different salaries for what amounts to the same job at companies where I work.

I did read it. It was the use of the plural "companies" that wasn't clear. It made me think you were referring to jobs across different companies rather than within the same company.

quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
The primary determinant of what you make is what you made at your last job.... But a good friend of mine who was hired to do exactly the same job at the same company made literally half of what I was making.

Anyhow now that I'm clear about what you're saying I must say that does surprise me. If there are differences in performance then it seems justifiable, and if there are increments related to time spent at the company that can be justified, but having workers following the same job description for different pay with no clear reason seems a recipe for ill feeling and poor morale to me.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Please note that the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act has nothing to do with imposing salary requirements on any employer. What it does do is extend the time emloyees have to file suit if they feel they have been underpaid. They would still have to prove this in court to obtain redress for past or present discrimination.

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Pardon my hubris, but sounds like you didn't read my post other than the one line you wanted to pounce on. Because what you have said here simply illustrates the same point I was making-- that your argument is not re: the worthiness of the goal but rather the difficulty of enforcement.

No, I am not saying that it is difficult to measure. I am saying that it is a meaningless concept. "Green ideas" aren't difficult to measure -- they are nonsense.

--Tom Clune

It's not a "meaningless concept". I think everyone here can understand what it means, what it would be. Every argument you have presented has been to the difficulty of measurement/ enforcement, not to concept itself. Again, it may be unworkable because of the vague, illusive and/or unreasonable factors that determine pay scale, but that again goes to the concept of feasibility, not desirability.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
If there are differences in performance then it seems justifiable, and if there are increments related to time spent at the company that can be justified, but having workers following the same job description for different pay with no clear reason seems a recipe for ill feeling and poor morale to me.

Such is life on this side of the pond. Large employers and government jobs have "pay levels" that have tight ranges. But virtually all other employers pay what they have to to get the people they are looking for. Pay inequality is the norm, not the exception.

--Tom Clune

[ 19. October 2012, 14:51: Message edited by: tclune ]

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
]It's not a "meaningless concept". I think everyone here can understand what it means, what it would be. Every argument you have presented has been to the difficulty of measurement/ enforcement, not to concept itself. Again, it may be unworkable because of the vague, illusive and/or unreasonable factors that determine pay scale, but that again goes to the concept of feasibility, not desirability.

You really don't get it. There is nothing intrinsic to spending your day pumping out cess pools that makes the job "worth" less than managing an international company AFAICS. Unless you mean that "equal work" is the same number of hours taken from your life, the notion just doesn't make sense. It isn't a problem of "measurement" or "enforcement" to rank the relative "value" of being a janitor and being a fisherman: it is that the idea is absurd. I really do mean exactly what I say here. You are free to disagree, but I said what I intended to convey.

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
]It's not a "meaningless concept". I think everyone here can understand what it means, what it would be. Every argument you have presented has been to the difficulty of measurement/ enforcement, not to concept itself. Again, it may be unworkable because of the vague, illusive and/or unreasonable factors that determine pay scale, but that again goes to the concept of feasibility, not desirability.

You really don't get it. There is nothing intrinsic to spending your day pumping out cess pools that makes the job "worth" less than managing an international company AFAICS. Unless you mean that "equal work" is the same number of hours taken from your life, the notion just doesn't make sense. It isn't a problem of "measurement" or "enforcement" to rank the relative "value" of being a janitor and being a fisherman: it is that the idea is absurd. I really do mean exactly what I say here. You are free to disagree, but I said what I intended to convey.

--Tom Clune

Obviously we are going around in circles. But I think you are not reading/following me. I understand you are saying: that pay is often not based on merit or the value of the work, concepts that are central to pay equity. I agree.

But my point is that that doesn't make the concept of pay equity meaningless. We can all understand what pay equity means. We can all understand what it would be like if the world worked in such a way that pay scales were related in some way to the value of the work and the effort/expertise of the worker. Whether or not that is the reality in the real world does not alter the "meaningfulness" or the desirability of the goal. It may, however, alter it's feasibility.

(Although let me add that "pay equity" never has attempted to parse the differences you're talking about between different types of work-- cess pool pumper v. fisherman, etc. It has been about differences of pay within the same job title/position at the same company/corp. I think you know that. Your example muddies the water-- your prior posts about the differences that effect pay within the same job title is more to the point, but again, really only goes to feasibility, not desirability).

[ 19. October 2012, 15:13: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I cannot say what I was saying any more plainly than I have. I surrender.

--Tom Clune

[ 19. October 2012, 15:17: Message edited by: tclune ]

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
I cannot say what I was saying any more plainly than I have. I surrender.

--Tom Clune

My feelings precisely! One of us is
[brick wall]

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
You really don't get it. There is nothing intrinsic to spending your day pumping out cess pools that makes the job "worth" less than managing an international company AFAICS.

But presumably a day pumping out cess pools is worth the same as a day pumping out cess pools. Law of identity and all that.

A video illustration of unequal pay for equal work from the field of primatology. So simple even tclune can get it (I hope)!

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
(Although let me add that "pay equity" never has attempted to parse the differences you're talking about between different types of work-- cess pool pumper v. fisherman, etc. It has been about differences of pay within the same job title/position at the same company/corp. I think you know that.

Let me just say one last thing -- pehaps this will be clear enough that we can come to at least an understanding on this: The EEOC says of equal pay for equal work, "employers may not pay unequal wages to men and women who perform jobs that require substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility, and that are performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment."

The point you raised above is just plain false. Equal pay for equal work was NEVER limited to "same pay for the same job."

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
(Although let me add that "pay equity" never has attempted to parse the differences you're talking about between different types of work-- cess pool pumper v. fisherman, etc. It has been about differences of pay within the same job title/position at the same company/corp. I think you know that.

Let me just say one last thing -- pehaps this will be clear enough that we can come to at least an understanding on this: The EEOC says of equal pay for equal work, "employers may not pay unequal wages to men and women who perform jobs that require substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility, and that are performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment."

The point you raised above is just plain false. Equal pay for equal work was NEVER limited to "same pay for the same job."

--Tom Clune

Sadly, yet more
[brick wall] because the above seems to be simply a more nuanced way of saying the same thing-- "substantially equal" rather than the unmodified "equal", "similar working conditions" rather than "same", "same establishment" = well, same establishment.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
A free market requires buyers and sellers to have substantially equal information about the transaction, about the quality and pricing of competitors' goods and services, and so on.

The buyers in the labor market, however, ensures that the sellers do not have access to the information they need to price their product. You can get fired for discussing your wages with a co-worker.

Besides the Lily Ledbetter act, we also need a law that forbids any company to restrict information about employee wages. Doing that would result in a race to pay equity (at least with respect to the same job at the same company).

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
You can get fired for discussing your wages with a co-worker.

I may well be out of date here, but I know for a fact that this did not used to be true. It was protected by labor laws as part of a worker's right to organize. Are you sure that an employer can legally fire a worker for discussing their wages with a co-worker? Do you know when this became legal?

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
It's an item in my (not-for-profit) employment contract, either just above or below (don't recall which, and can't be arsed to look) the item about safeguarding client info under "confidentiality."

*Of course, it might still be illegal; companies do pretty much whatever they they think they can get away with, IMO.

[ 19. October 2012, 17:17: Message edited by: Porridge ]

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
It's an item in my (not-for-profit) employment contract, either just above or below (don't recall which, and can't be arsed to look) the item about safeguarding client info under "confidentiality."

Do you live in the US?

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
moron
Shipmate
# 206

 - Posted      Profile for moron   Email moron   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
ouch:

quote:
Governor Romney's argument is 'we're not fixed, so fire him and put me in.' It is true, we're not fixed. When President Obama looked into the eyes of that man who said in the debate, 'I had so much hope four years ago and I don't now,' I thought he was going to cry because he knows that it's not fixed.
So is Obama unfit for re-election because he still doesn't know better than to piss Bill off?
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
You can get fired for discussing your wages with a co-worker.

I may well be out of date here, but I know for a fact that this did not used to be true. It was protected by labor laws as part of a worker's right to organize. Are you sure that an employer can legally fire a worker for discussing their wages with a co-worker? Do you know when this became legal?
I've never known that it was ever illegal. In most states, an employer doesn't have to have a reason to fire you, and can fire you for any reason at all, or no reason (with a handful of exceptions regarding race, gender, etc.).

Can you provide a link that shows that talking about wages and benefits with co-workers is a protected activity? I'd love to see it, if it is.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Can you provide a link that shows that talking about wages and benefits with co-workers is a protected activity? I'd love to see it, if it is.

Not off the top of my head. I haven't paid attention to labor law for over three decades, but I am sure that it was illegal at that time. This seems like the kind of thing thaat Croesos might know off the top of his head. Croesos?

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Not off the top of my head. I haven't paid attention to labor law for over three decades, but I am sure that it was illegal at that time. This seems like the kind of thing thaat Croesos might know off the top of his head. Croesos?

Always happy to provide some linkedy goodness. Didn't know off the top of my head, but my good friend Mr. Google was able to provide some insight:

quote:
Many businesses and corporations have gone so far as to establish rules forbidding employees from discussing their wages, on pain of disciplinary action.

It turns out that in most cases these regulations are actually against the law.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled on many occasions that businesses and corporations cannot legally prevent employees from sharing their salaries or the salaries of their co-workers. In most cases, employers are not required to publicize the wages of their employees, but neither can they bar them from giving that information to each other or the media. When disgruntled employees bring these regulations to the attention of the NLRB, the employer is required to remove the language from their employee manuals. (This doesn’t apply to managers, supervisors and other employees not under the jurisdiction of the NLRB.)

Some states, such as Colorado and California, have gone a step further. They have passed laws singling out wage discussion as a “protected activity,” just like campaigning for politicians or caring for a sick relative. In these states, no employee (not even managers) can be fired for talking about their salaries.

So it seems to come down to:

1) Many companies have internal rules forbidding discussing your wages.

2) Such rules probably aren't legal, though it may depend on what jurisdiction you work in.

3) The remedy available to you if your company fires you for discussing your wages as per its policy is to get relief via the courts, a very slow and expensive process with an uncertain outcome.

In short, in strictly legal terms it's forbidden but in practical reality it's definitely possible.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Sorry -- late to the party, but:

@ tclune: I'm in the states, not all that far from you.

@ croesos: So do you have to get fired first? Can't you just lodge a complaint with the NRLB?

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
OR NLRB, if you prefer.

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
Josephine

Orthodox Belle
# 3899

 - Posted      Profile for Josephine   Author's homepage   Email Josephine   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Are the Romneys buying voting machine companies? I haven't seen the story yet on a major site, but it has to be a concern for anyone who cares about fair elections.

--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!

Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Are the Romneys buying voting machine companies? I haven't seen the story yet on a major site, but it has to be a concern for anyone who cares about fair elections.

If it were the Koch brothers buying the machines, it would make me worried. But personally, I just can't muster the paranoia to worry about Romney this way. I think that the more likely vulnerability of voting machines is from hackers, which can cut just about any way you can imagine.

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
If it were the Koch brothers buying the machines, it would make me worried. But personally, I just can't muster the paranoia to worry about Romney this way. I think that the more likely vulnerability of voting machines is from hackers, which can cut just about any way you can imagine.

Depends on what you mean by "hackers". Historically the biggest security breaches in the American voting system has been in the form of crooked election officials.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338

 - Posted      Profile for cliffdweller     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
Are the Romneys buying voting machine companies? I haven't seen the story yet on a major site, but it has to be a concern for anyone who cares about fair elections.

If it were the Koch brothers buying the machines, it would make me worried. But personally, I just can't muster the paranoia to worry about Romney this way. I think that the more likely vulnerability of voting machines is from hackers, which can cut just about any way you can imagine.

--Tom Clune

Romney acting alone, maybe not (although who knows? the guy's not exactly transparent). But with Karl Rove heading up his largest super pac? Oh, yeah, Worry.

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Josephine--

You might try Huffington Post for corroboration on the voting machines. I did a search ("romney voting machines", I think) and came up with quite a few hits. My dial-up connection is fitful tonight, so I can't bring them up. Might be worth a check, though.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Ok, a Forbes columnist has written about the voting machine investments. I skimmed through. Looks like mostly his thoughts on the story that so many smaller sites are carrying. But he seems to take it seriously.

FWIW.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200

 - Posted      Profile for Og: Thread Killer     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Hmmm....twitter is about as civil as Gettysburg when it comes to this debate stuff.

--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."

Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Hmmm....twitter is about as civil as Gettysburg when it comes to this debate stuff.

And speaking of same, it's apparently via Twitter that The Donald plans to make a big announcement about Obama Wednesday.

See here.

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597

 - Posted      Profile for Stetson     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
Hmmm....twitter is about as civil as Gettysburg when it comes to this debate stuff.

And speaking of same, it's apparently via Twitter that The Donald plans to make a big announcement about Obama Wednesday.

See here.

If this has anything to do with birtherism, then Trump had better produce absolutely irrefutable evidence that Obama was born outside the USA. Anything short of that is just gonna make the GOP look desperate and stupid(at least to anyone not already on the birther bandwagon, which is populated almost entirely by commited Republians anyway).
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
SPANK.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Porridge
Shipmate
# 15405

 - Posted      Profile for Porridge   Email Porridge   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
[Confused]

It certainly looks like English, MT, but personally I could use a translation. Google brings me an uneasy mix of adult content & child-rearing advice . . .

--------------------
Spiggott: Everything I've ever told you is a lie, including that.
Moon: Including what?
Spiggott: That everything I've ever told you is a lie.
Moon: That's not true!

Posts: 3925 | From: Upper right corner | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged
moron
Shipmate
# 206

 - Posted      Profile for moron   Email moron   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I think he's testing one worders... translation: the President attended last evening.

[Help]

Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mousethief

Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953

 - Posted      Profile for mousethief     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
The president handed Mitt's ass to him last night, gift-wrapped, with a beautiful bow and a nice card.

--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...

Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  ...  71  72  73 
 
Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
Open thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools