Monday, June 30, 2008
|
|
Pay Differentials in the Obama Office
|
|
Posted by:
Donald Kochan at
6:38 PM
|
Don't get me wrong, I am completely for salaries based on merit alone and think sex differentials should have zero, no difference. But these reports about the pay in Mr. "Equal Pay" Obama's offices seem interesting, especially as compared to McCain -- although as with most such studies I do not presume a causal relationship to evidence of discrimination. But since Obama, see here for example, does make such presumptions when there is a disparity in pay . . . .
Click here and here for the reports.
I think these reports provide a ridiculous critique, but equally ridiculous are most of the claims, like Obama's, for coercive equal pay requirements rather than allowing the market to set salaries based on merit.
|
|
This is actually quite interesting. The probably response from the Obama camp will be that the disparity in pay is a reflection of the difference in experience level.
Which is a perfectly justifiable answer.
But it runs counter to the objectives of the "equal pay" group, who seek to minimize or eliminate differences in experience. Or, more precisely, they wish to discount disparity in experience when it's the woman who has the lesser experience.
The "women make 70 cents on the dollar compared to men" canard does NOT take into account disparity of experience. It does not. To say it does means you're a fool. Because if there was any place in America today where a woman, doing the *exact* same thing as a man, made 70% of what the man made ... well, let's just say I'd love to be the attorney for the plaintiff in that case. It's be a nice fat commission on that, for sure.
Nobody -- and I mean NOBODY -- advocates unequal pay for precisely the same work. Nobody. But experience matters, particularly in jobs where that experience influences judgment. That's why more experienced campaign staffers make more money ... they have better judgment, forged by years of experience and learning.
Personally, my guess is Obama has hired a bunch of experienced men and he's paying them what they command. No problem there. McCain, interestingly, has more women. Read into that what you will. Frankly, there's probably not much there to be read.
The dilemma is that Obama really can't defend his practice based on the reality of disparity of experience without taking the legs out from under the argument of the "equal pay" crowd who rely -- RELY! -- on a dismissal of differential experience as the basis for their agenda to equalize pay. |
|
"Coercive" is your word, not Obama's. It is disingenuous not to make that crystal clear. He believes in the same pay for the same work.
But since you feel no obligation to take responsibility for your remarks or engage in debate, who cares about your biased statements? |
|
|
Oh yeah, they get paid now in vouchers for McDonalds (Arby's for special ocassions). |
|
You are citing to a CNSnews.com story? Not to mention cherry-picking numbers to come up with an inane point as they never bother to compare the different positions of each staffer.
This is the kind of education taking place at Chapman University? Perhaps Professor you'd be so kind as to list the individual staff positions so we can see if gender played any roll in the disparity or if the result was skewed by the different capacities held by each employee (e.g. a Chief of Staff would make considerably more than a file clerk which would make any kind of gender earning comparison plain stupid). By the way Professor Kochan, male McCain interns made more than female McCain interns. Why isn't that your headline? |
|
|
|