Print Page | Close Window

Female Editors Pay Was 100K Less Than Counterpart

Printed From: Black Hair Media Forum
Category: Lets Talk
Forum Name: Talk, Talk, and More Talk
Forum Description: In this Forum, the talk is about everything that can be talked about.
URL: http://Forum.BlackHairMedia.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=370753
Printed Date: Feb 23 2018 at 1:33pm


Topic: Female Editors Pay Was 100K Less Than Counterpart
Posted By: bindy
Subject: Female Editors Pay Was 100K Less Than Counterpart
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 10:34am

Ousted New York Times editor Jill Abramson's salary 'was $100,000 less than one male counterpart and fell behind those of male colleagues for 14 years'

  • Abramson was abruptly fired on Wednesday after having a lawyer look into pay discrepancies
  • New reports reveal Bill Keller, the executive editor she took over for in 2011, was paid $559,000 when he left and her starting salary was $475,000
  • Her salary was eventually increased to $503,000 
  • When she complained after learning that it was less than her male predecessor, it was increased to $525,000
  • Comes hours after The Times published put out a statement saying it was 'simply not true that Jill's compensation was significantly less'
  • She later learned she had also been paid less than her male colleagues in her two prior posts as co-managing editor and Washington bureau chief

By  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=Meghan+Keneally" rel="nofollow - MEGHAN KENEALLY

PUBLISHED: 07:54 EST, 16 May 2014 UPDATED: 09:52 EST, 16 May 2014

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630465/Jill-Abramsons-salary-100-000-counterpart-fell-male-colleagues-14-years.html#comments" rel="nofollow -
Fired: Jill Abramson was paid significantly less than her male counterparts for the past 13 years
+3

Fired: Jill Abramson was paid significantly less than her male counterparts for the past 13 years

The recently-ousted executive editor of The New York Times had been paid more than a hundred thousand dollars less throughout her career at the paper than her male counterparts, new reports reveal today. 

Jill Abramson's unexpected removal from the paper of record came as a shock to many and once speculation began to swirl that she had raised concerns about gender pay discrepancies before her firing, the owner of The Times tried to dismiss those claims by saying that she was paid more than her male predecessor- a statement that has now been proven untrue.

Bill Keller was the paper's executive editor from July 2003 until he resigned and Abramson replaced him in September 2011. Her starting salary at that point was $475,000 while Keller's salary in 2011, after eight years as editor, was $559,000.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/05/jill-abramson-and-the-times-what-went-wrong.html" rel="nofollow - The New Yorker  reports that her salary was raised at some point in the past three years to $503,000 and then when she complained about the discrepancy recently, it was raised again to $525,000- but that still left her $34,000 short of Keller's final salary.

This is a direct contradiction to what Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr, said in a public statement that he released to attempt to tamper the fires once word got out that pay discrepancy was a factor in Abramson's dismissal.

Scroll down for video

Succession plan: Bill Keller (right) left the executive editor spot in September 2011 and Abramson (center) replaced him- though she was paid nearly $85,000 less at the time. Dean Baquet (left) has since replaced her
+3

Succession plan: Bill Keller (right) left the executive editor spot in September 2011 and Abramson (center) replaced him- though she was paid nearly $85,000 less at the time. Dean Baquet (left) has since replaced her

'Her pay is comparable to that of earlier executive editors. In fact, in 2013, her last full year in the role, her total compensation package was more than 10% higher than that of her predecessor, Bill Keller, in his last full year as Executive Editor, which was 2010,' Sulzberger said in the statement. 

'It was also higher than his total compensation in any previous year.'

TIMELINE OF TIMES PAY: MORE THAN A DECADE OF DISCREPANCIES

December 2000: Jill Abramson becomes the Washington bureau chief, taking over after Phil Taubman. He was reportedly paid at least $100,000 more than she was

July 2003: Abramson and John Geddes were appointed as co-managing editors by Bill Keller, who had just been appointed as the paper's executive editor. Abramson earned $398,000 which was less than Geddes, though it is unclear how much he earned

September 2011: Keller stepped down and Abramson took his place, making her the first female executive editor of the paper. Keller's salary was $559,000 at the time and Abramson's starting salary was $475,000

If The New Yorker's figures are true, Sulzberger's statement is factually incorrect.

Behind closed doors before her dismissal, Abramson was reportedly angered further when she later discovered that the pay discrepancy did not just start when she reached the top of the masthead.

She learned that she consistently earned less than her male counterparts when she was both managing editor and the Washington bureau chief.

As managing editor, she earned $398,000 which the New Yorker reports is less than what John Geddes, her male co-managing editor, earned.

Phil Taubman was paid at least $100,000 more than Abramson when he served as Washington bureau chief before she did from 2000 to 2003. 

These figures, reported late Thursday by The New Yorker's media reporter Ken Auletta, contradict what Sulzberger Jr said in the public statement that he released to attempt to tamper the fires once word got out that pay discrepancy was a factor in Abramson's dismissal.

'It is simply not true that Jill’s compensation was significantly less than her predecessors,' he said in the statement released Thursday afternoon, one day after he announced the removal of Abramson. 

 

More...

  • http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630378/I-feel-bad-role-helping-push-humiliation-point-suffocation-David-Letterman-tells-Barbara-Walters-gone-far-Monica-Lewinsky-scandal.html" rel="nofollow - 'I feel bad about my role in helping push the humiliation to the point of suffocation': David Letterman tells Barbara Walters that he may have gone too far during Monica Lewinsky scandal
  • http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2629748/Jill-Abramson-takes-boxing-NYT-brass-insist-firing-wasnt-pay.html" rel="nofollow - Jill Abramson takes up boxing as NYT top brass insist firing wasn't about pay

The Times' spokeswoman Eileen Murphy has made the point repeatedly that the editors' compensation levels cannot be looked at as one solitary figure because the editors also receive bonuses, stock grants, and unspecified long-term incentives.

#pushy: Recently canned New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson is using her newly discovered free time to take up boxing...and to fuel rumors she was fired for being #pushy with this Instagram photo posted by her daughter
+3

#pushy: Recently canned New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson is using her newly discovered free time to take up boxing...and to fuel rumors she was fired for being #pushy with this Instagram photo posted by her daughter

According to The New Yorker reporter Ken Auletta, Ms Murphy 'conceded' that Abramson's recent decision to hire a lawyer to look into the discrepancy issue did play a role in her firing- not because of the famously-liberal company's lack of dedication to equal pay but because 'it was part of a pattern'. 

Sulzberger has consistently tried to paint the firing as a result of conflicting management styles- Abramson's allegedly being too brusque and, as quoted in one report, 'pushy', as opposed to her replacement Dean Baquet who is known for being well-liked in the newsroom and more approachable than his female predecessor.  


NYT Publisher: Pay Had No Part In Abramson Ouster

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher of the New York Times and chairman of its parent company, is denying media reports that executive editor Jill Abramson's dismissal had to do with her complaints over unequal pay....

< style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: line; border-width: 0px; border-top-left-radius: 0px; border-top-right-radius: 0px; border-bottom-right-radius: 0px; border-bottom-left-radius: 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px;">

'IT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE': NYT PUBLISHER ARTHUR SULZBERGER JR. ASSERTS THAT ABRAMSON WAS PAID MORE THAN KELLER IN STATEMENT

Memo from Arthur Sulzberger Jr. obtained by  http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/sulzberger-not-true-abramson-paid-less-188606.html" rel="nofollow - POLITICO

Dear Colleagues,

I am writing to you because I am concerned about the misinformation that has been widely circulating in the media since I announced Jill Abramson’s departure yesterday.  I particularly want to set the record straight about Jill’s pay as Executive Editor of The Times.

Pushback: NYT publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. has already swung back with a Thursday memo to employees that said not only was Abramson not paid less than her male predecessor, but was compensated more

Pushback: NYT publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. has already swung back with a Thursday memo to employees that said not only was Abramson not paid less than her male predecessor, but was compensated more

It is simply not true that Jill’s compensation was significantly less than her predecessors.  Her pay is comparable to that of earlier executive editors.  In fact, in 2013, her last full year in the role, her total compensation package was more than 10% higher than that of her predecessor, Bill Keller, in his last full year as Executive Editor, which was 2010.  It was also higher than his total compensation in any previous year.

Comparisons between the pensions of different executive editors are difficult for several reasons.  Pensions are based upon years of service with the Company.  Jill’s years of service were significantly fewer than those of many of her predecessors.  Secondly, as you may know, pension plans for all managers at The New York Times were frozen in 2009.  But this and all other pension changes at the Company have been applied without any gender bias and Jill was not singled out or differentially disadvantaged in any way.

Compensation played no part whatsoever in my decision that Jill could not remain as executive editor. Nor did any discussion about compensation.  The reason — the only reason — for that decision was concerns I had about some aspects of Jill’s management of our newsroom, which I had previously made clear to her, both face-to-face and in my annual assessment.

This Company is fully committed to equal treatment of all its employees, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation or any other characteristic. We are working hard to live up to that principle in every part of our organization.  I am satisfied that we fully lived up to that commitment with regard to Jill.

Arthur

Read more:
  • http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/05/jill-abramson-and-the-times-what-went-wrong.html" rel="nofollow - Jill Abramson, Arthur Sulzberger, and the New York Times: What Went Wrong?

Share or comment on this article



Read more:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630465/Jill-Abramsons-salary-100-000-counterpart-fell-male-colleagues-14-years.html#ixzz31tQ4E5IX" rel="nofollow - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2630465/Jill-Abramsons-salary-100-000-counterpart-fell-male-colleagues-14-years.html#ixzz31tQ4E5IX  
Follow us:  http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=MailOnline" rel="nofollow - @MailOnline on Twitter  |  http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=bBOTTqvd0r3Pooab7jrHcU&u=DailyMail" rel="nofollow - DailyMail on Facebook



Replies:
Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 10:43am
*Insert bindy 'lawsuit' gif*

Get money girl.

And here I thought the NYT was progressive.Ermm


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 10:44am
keep ya eyes on your own paycheck..



Posted By: melikey
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 10:46am
I'm happy this issue is starting to get more attention. With so many working women contributing to the household income you'd think men would rally around their wives and their families but the male privilege is so deep they don't even see how short changing women affects them as well.


Posted By: EPITOME
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 10:50am
Y'all can thank Obama for the Lily Ledbetter Act....I believe it was one of the first, if not the first Act he signed into law, that helps women and other minorities and gives them more time to bring these actions.


Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 10:56am
@ Epitome: Yes ma'am. Repubs dragging their feet and voting against the Paycheck Fairness Act to allow workers to know what they are making in comparison to their peers.

Originally posted by ModelessDiva ModelessDiva wrote:

keep ya eyes on your own paycheck..

Guuurl no!

You know as a Black woman, you're paid about 63 cents to a yt mans' $1 right? That includes adjustments for child bearing, pt/ft work, etc. These businesses would love for you to keep your eyes on your own paycheck so you don't notice you're not getting paid fairly.Wink


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:07am
Life isn't fair though. We aren't viewed as a white man's equal so you shouldn't be surprised the pay isn't equal.... But worrying about what other people are doing/making is the quickest way to lose what you already have.


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:13am
Just my opinion though...If I feel like I'm not making enough I'm gonna step and do what I need to do to make more. I'm not factoring anyone else into it.


Posted By: goodm3
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:14am
Originally posted by carolina cutie carolina cutie wrote:

@ Epitome: Yes ma'am. Repubs dragging their feet and voting against the Paycheck Fairness Act to allow workers to know what they are making in comparison to their peers.

Originally posted by ModelessDiva ModelessDiva wrote:

keep ya eyes on your own paycheck..

Guuurl no!

You know as a Black woman, you're paid about 63 cents to a yt mans' $1 right? That includes adjustments for child bearing, pt/ft work, etc. These businesses would love for you to keep your eyes on your own paycheck so you don't notice you're not getting paid fairly.Wink

exactly...which is why we should blink twice about changing jobs for money. 


Posted By: melikey
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:15am
Nothing is given to women and minorities in the workplace. You have to demand it. You also need to be armed with knowledge.

Passively waiting for a white man to give you something will leave you at the bottom


Posted By: melikey
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:19am
Originally posted by ModelessDiva ModelessDiva wrote:

Just my opinion though...If I feel like I'm not making enough I'm gonna step and do what I need to do to make more. I'm not factoring anyone else into it.


It will take you less than a year of putting out higher quality work and having more "respect" than any of your peers on the same level before you start asking why your title/compensation isn't higher than theirs. Either that or you'll get frustrated and self sabotage because you are waiting on someone to notice.


Posted By: lumii18
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:22am
Lmfao @ doing what you have to do. You could be the most and the white man doing the least would still get paid more.


Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:23am
Originally posted by ModelessDiva ModelessDiva wrote:

Just my opinion though...If I feel like I'm not making enough I'm gonna step and do what I need to do to make more. I'm not factoring anyone else into it.

Have your heard about the glass ceiling?


Posted By: bindy
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:24am


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:43am
lol..
I don't see why y'all get so concerned over my opinion...especially when I put "just my opinion" if you don't agree...don't agree and move on...
I'm not explaining any further...I don't care enough..
I'm 100% sure she was satisfied and would have been fine with what she was making until she got a glance of what her male counterpart was making. Worry about yourself. Not about what other people are doing/making. If you're not satisfied with where you are do something about it. I hate people that are always looking over their shoulder trying to see what the next person is doing.
If that doesn't make sense then I'm sorry. *shrugs*


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:54am
if a woman in leadership is getting short changed then that's a corporate culture thing that carries over to all women in the organization 

This needs to be out in the open, and hopefully since her role is high profile it'll make it easier for the rest of us to not need a lawyer/investigation to know whether we're getting stiffed. 




Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:58am
"just be satisfied with what you get" 

goes against everything I believe


Posted By: herwoman
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 11:59am
Originally posted by bindy bindy wrote:



Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 12:00pm
Originally posted by rickysrose rickysrose wrote:

"just be satisfied with what you get" 

goes against everything I believe
Hush up Ricky! You ain't the yt man's equal! Take the yt man's scraps and be happy. 


Posted By: herwoman
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 12:01pm
Originally posted by rickysrose rickysrose wrote:

"just be satisfied with what you get" 
<span style="line-height: 1.4;">
</span>
<span style="line-height: 1.4;">goes against everything I believe</span>
That's because you are throw back black, the new black ain't got time to be going against the grain.


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 12:04pm
thats pretty much what I heard cc

every fibre of my being recoiled






Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 12:05pm
IA with err'body on this page. Republicans still singing that same song right now for women and minorities. 'You don't deserve equal pay.'


Posted By: SeducTress
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 12:26pm
Lawd

MD is a young lady. She has those rose colored lenses still on.

I can't recall ever thinking like her per se.... but I was a bit naive, optimistic, etc etc back in the dizzle.

Hmmmm. I was jealous of her innocence for like, 2.5 seconds.Embarrassed

Then I snapped back into my reality as an adult in this here 2014






It's so disheartening to be over qualified and under paid.....off the strength of gender and race?

Ch...

You're a woman and you're black. Two strikes. Tighten up.


Posted By: afrokock
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 12:27pm
Damn they played her


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 1:18pm
Originally posted by SeducTress SeducTress wrote:

MD is a young lady. She has those rose colored lenses still on.


oh..


Posted By: _ConcreteRose_
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 1:42pm
Ayy don't make this a young thing! Lol
I don't agree with wage discrimination, and she had every right to fight it.


Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 1:46pm
Modeless, I can see where you're coming from. At least, the way I can look at it is, it's never going to be equal so I may as well get all that I can and past that keep my mind on my own pocketbook. We all choose what battles we want to fight, emotionally and in reality.

The sad truth is this woman's fight for equal pay, which she and every woman should have, is not going to help any of the few black women who work at NYT or anywhere else.

But good for her.


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 2:15pm

Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

Modeless, I can see where you're coming from. At least, the way I can look at it is, it's never going to be equal so I may as well get all that I can and past that keep my mind on my own pocketbook. We all choose what battles we want to fight, emotionally and in reality.

The sad truth is this woman's fight for equal pay, which she and every woman should have, is not going to help any of the few black women who work at NYT or anywhere else.

But good for her.


if only i could thank this twice...
Heart




Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 2:48pm
i dont believe in "shut up it's no use" either




Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 2:50pm
Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


well of course..............

more reason all black women should fight for equal pay
shut up it's no use.Stern Smile


Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 2:55pm
Originally posted by carolina cutie carolina cutie wrote:

Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


well of course..............

more reason all black women should fight for equal pay
shut up it's no use.Stern Smile

ROFL. But seriously even though my mom grew up in a family(culture) were they didn't put women through school because they didn't "need it". She said, " nah man I got to get an education I want to be smart  I won't settle for you're a woman and just take what you can get,". She helped me have that fighting spirit in me no matter what. I will be darned if I have the ability to fight and choose not to because it is more difficult and seems darned near impossible. NOPE! not I said the cat!


Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 2:56pm
Originally posted by _ConcreteRose_ _ConcreteRose_ wrote:

Ayy don't make this a young thing! Lol
I don't agree with wage discrimination, and she had every right to fight it.

ROFL, but you're special ConcreteLOL


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 2:58pm
cc! 

LOL


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:03pm
awareness is half the battle... this might not have occurred to many women, at least, hopefully, more will check into their pay in comparison to their male and/or white counterparts 

IMO, there is no downside to this lady publicizing this inequity




Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:04pm
Originally posted by rickysrose rickysrose wrote:

awareness is half the battle... this might not have occurred to many women, at least, hopefully, more will check into their pay in comparison to their male and/or white counterparts 

IMO, there is no downside to this lady publicizing this inequity



Nice to read your post again.


Posted By: EPITOME
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:06pm
...eh when you get a real job then you'll get it


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:06pm
will have to agree to disagree..

good luck to her anyway..get that money gurlBig smile


Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:07pm
Originally posted by EPITOME EPITOME wrote:

...eh when you get a real job then you'll get it

ROFL not true. I've felt like this way before I started working. She probably wouldn't care either way. Some people just don't mind.


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:07pm
I'd tell a personal story about how I learned and profited in this Corp pay game but bhm isnt quite the place




Posted By: JasmineE02
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:07pm
And it happens everywhere.  My organization is for women and run by women....the handful of men employed there still get paid more. Stern Smile  I'm waiting for ish to go down.  LOL


Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:08pm
Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


pm me ricky

Man I want to know tooCry


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:09pm

a real job?

lmaooooooooooooooooo feelings def got caught

let me leave good luck guysBeerLOL




Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:10pm
Originally posted by ModelessDiva ModelessDiva wrote:


a real job?

lmaooooooooooooooooo feelings def got caught

let me leave good luck guysBeerLOL



ROFL, I don't think she meant any harm by it. More like when you start on your career path.


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:15pm
Originally posted by JasmineE02 JasmineE02 wrote:

And it happens everywhere.  My organization is for women and run by women....the handful of men employed there still get paid more. Stern Smile  I'm waiting for ish to go down.  LOL


this was so not the case when I worked for a woman owned company.  And she was black too so I was in the best of both worlds.

yay for woman in OP and other women doing the same.


Posted By: JasmineE02
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:17pm
Originally posted by PurplePhase PurplePhase wrote:

Originally posted by JasmineE02 JasmineE02 wrote:

And it happens everywhere.  My organization is for women and run by women....the handful of men employed there still get paid more. Stern Smile  I'm waiting for ish to go down.  LOL


this was so not the case when I worked for a woman owned company.  And she was black too so I was in the best of both worlds.

yay for woman in OP and other women doing the same.

I'm glad. Heart  The lady running things where I work is....*rubs temples* challenging.  


Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:18pm
Originally posted by EPITOME EPITOME wrote:

feelings of anger? not even a little bc i don't think your viewpoint is realistic and it shaped by your lack of real world experience of the corporate world. i can't be mad at ignorance.


Posted By: EPITOME
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:18pm
feelings of anger? not even a little bc i don't think your viewpoint is realistic and it shaped by your lack of real world experience of the corporate world. i can't be mad at ignorance.


Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:18pm
Everyone doesn't have to be bothered by everything, even if it directly affects them.

Not knocking awareness at all. But we all choose where to spend our emotional energy. Some people don't want to spend it on futile endeavors and would rather focus on something else.




Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:23pm
Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

Everyone doesn't have to be bothered by everything, even if it directly affects them.

Not knocking awareness at all. But we all choose where to spend our emotional energy. Some people don't want to spend it on futile endeavors and would rather focus on something else.



True, some people are leaders most are followers. I'm not offended more saddened. But I'm not disappointed because some views will only be changed when life slaps them up a little.

And why do you that it is futile?The women's suffrage movement wouldn't have happened if everyone just said, " Let's give up this is futile".


Posted By: iliveforbhm
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:23pm
Wow, no wonder nothing gets done. Just mind your business amd do what your suppose to be doing while I screw you over. A damn shame how some folks think.


Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:25pm
Originally posted by iliveforbhm iliveforbhm wrote:

Wow, no wonder nothing gets done. Just mind your business amd do what your suppose to be doing while I screw you over. A damn shame how some folks think.

Clap


Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:25pm
I think chalking the perspective up to ignorance and a lack of "real world" experience is condescending.




Posted By: EPITOME
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:26pm
and i don't mean ignorance in like a b*tchy way but literally just not knowing. and honestly until i read the Lily Ledbetter case and worked on some similar sh*t, I didn't know either.  Bc your employer will tell you they're paying you the same as everyone else but not.  They'll lie. 

eta: or they'll make up reasons why--like that article that said reviewers find more errors and are harsher on your work bc you're black. it's all very subtle sh*t especially since most people never discuss their wages at work. so how do you even find out? it's all very hidden under "performance" reviews and ish. I mean this woman is paid 100k LESS. some people don't ever make that in a year.  Can you imagine?


Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:27pm
Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


yeah feelings were caught

my feelings are very much into my pay

because well I need it to do things in life you know
Indeed.

I need my future husband to get paid fair wages too ya know? At this rate his ass will be making 80 some cents compared to his yt male counterparts.Ouch


Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:30pm
Originally posted by f8dagrate f8dagrate wrote:

Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

Everyone doesn't have to be bothered by everything, even if it directly affects them.

Not knocking awareness at all. But we all choose where to spend our emotional energy. Some people don't want to spend it on futile endeavors and would rather focus on something else.



True, some people are leaders most are followers. I'm not offended more saddened. But I'm not disappointed because some views will only be changed when life slaps them up a little.

And why do you that it is futile?The women's suffrage movement wouldn't have happened if everyone just said, " Let's give up this is futile".


I guess it just depends on how you look at the world. Every issue is not going to be resolved. So I spend my time on that which is more important to me. I think fighting against wage discrimination is pretty futile, so it's not something I'll spend time on in my own life aside from voting. It affects me but I'm meh about it so I'll let others fight the good fight.

I think parenting in poverty is a scourge on this earth, while other think it's futile to even think about addressing it. But I spend my energy on it because it's important to me.




Posted By: EPITOME
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:34pm
Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

Originally posted by f8dagrate f8dagrate wrote:

Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

Everyone doesn't have to be bothered by everything, even if it directly affects them.

Not knocking awareness at all. But we all choose where to spend our emotional energy. Some people don't want to spend it on futile endeavors and would rather focus on something else.



True, some people are leaders most are followers. I'm not offended more saddened. But I'm not disappointed because some views will only be changed when life slaps them up a little.

And why do you that it is futile?The women's suffrage movement wouldn't have happened if everyone just said, " Let's give up this is futile".


I guess it just depends on how you look at the world. Every issue is not going to be resolved. So I spend my time on that which is more important to me. I think fighting against wage discrimination is pretty futile, so it's not something I'll spend time on in my own life aside from voting. It affects me but I'm meh about it so I'll let others fight the good fight.

I think parenting in poverty is a scourge on this earth, while other think it's futile to even think about addressing it. But I spend my energy on it because it's important to me.




These two issues seem related to me no?


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:35pm
I can see how wage discrimination contributes to parenting in poverty ... 




Posted By: BBpants
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:37pm
Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


no it doesn't but okay

if you feel you are qualified or more qualified than someone that is making substantially more than then you should speak up

but an employer would probably love you....while you put in the work and get paid less and are okay with it


Yup Ouch


Posted By: ModelessDiva
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:39pm
Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

I think chalking the perspective up to ignorance and a lack of "real world" experience is condescending.



lol

let em have it...i dont entertain feelings..



Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:39pm
Yes, related in that I can't think of many issues that occur in a vacuum.

Poverty is caused by lots of things, wage discrimination being a small part of it. But choosing to parent in poverty is only tangentially related to wage discrimination.

Either way, parenting in poverty is far more important to me than wage discrimination.




Posted By: keepgrowing
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:44pm
This is ridiculous.


Posted By: EPITOME
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:46pm
Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

I think chalking the perspective up to ignorance and a lack of "real world" experience is condescending.



telling someone they simply don't work hard enough when they do the same work is condescending. it's the same logic used to counter Affirmative Action, fair pay acts, minimum wage, or most social programs....etc. etc.


Posted By: carolina cutie
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:47pm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2014/05/16/are-black-women-mia-in-the-equal-pay-debate/" rel="nofollow - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2014/05/16/are-black-women-mia-in-the-equal-pay-debate/

Are black women MIA in the equal pay debate?

By Marjorie Valbrun Updated: May 16 at 12:32 pm

Black women are among the lowest paid workers in the United States. In many professions they’re near the bottom of the pay scale. They earn less than white men – on average just 64 cents for every dollar paid to white men – and less than women overall, who earn on average 77 cents for every dollar earned by white men. And despite far outnumbering black men in the labor market, black women also earn less than their low-wage male counterparts.

Nevertheless, African-American women are heads of households in larger numbers than any other group. Some 4,078,457 U.S. households are headed by black women, and 38.1 percent, or 1,553,892, of those families live below the poverty level, C:%5CUsers%5CMVALB%5CDocuments%5Cthe-wage-gap-hurts.pdf" rel="nofollow - according to the National Partnership for Women and Families . An http://www.nationalpartnership.org/news-room/press-releases/a-look-at-the-wage-gap-for-aa.html" rel="nofollow - analysis by the organization using U.S. Census Bureau figures clearly indicates that black women are holding down jobs that don’t pay them enough to adequately support their families. Many of these women work in low-wage service industry jobs. Even in black households headed by two married parents, more than 50 percent of married mothers bring in half or more than half of their families’ income, the analysis found.

These numbers have far-reaching implications for black families, according to an issue brief, “ http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/report/2013/04/09/59731/how-pay-inequity-hurts-women-of-color/" rel="nofollow - How pay in equity hurts women of color ,” prepared by the Center for American Progress. Closing the wage gap is key to reducing poverty among women of color, including Hispanic women who earn 54 cents for every dollar earned by white men – and their families. Yet when it comes to policy debates about fair pay and gender gaps, income inequality and growing poverty, black women don’t appear to be visibly out front in large numbers on these important issues.

It’s unclear if they’re choosing not to lead the charge, or if they’re being ignored by the media or drowned out by louder factions in the pitched political battles over fair pay. Some may simply be too busy working and others may fear losing their jobs in a tight labor market.

By many accounts, the 15 black female members of Congress and the heads of black women’s civil rights organizations have worked hard to improve the economic status of women of color, but none has emerged as a leading voice on this issue.

“I just don’t think that black women are covered enough on these issues,” says Melanie L. Campbell, president and CEO of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation and convener of the Black Women’s Roundtable. “Part of it is we have to be more vocal and make sure we’re more organized and getting more actively involved when we have the opportunities.”

Campbell considers U.S. Rep. Marcia Fudge, who chairs the 43-member Congressional Black Caucus, one of the strongest leaders in Congress on fair pay issues. Still, she says, “We just don’t have enough women in Congress.”

In April, Campbell’s organization http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2014/03/27/report-black-women-are-political-powerhouse-yet-remain-socially-vulnerable/" rel="nofollow - released a major report  assessing the political, economic, and social status of black women. The report was given to the White House Council on Women and Girls, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Women’s Bureau, and to members of the Congressional Black Caucus and influential women’s groups around the country. The White House council is led by two women of color: Valerie Jarrett, senior adviser to President Obama, is chairwoman and Tina Tchen serves as executive director.

Campbell says her organization, which is also on the planning committee of the http://www.dol.gov/wb/workingfamilies/" rel="nofollow - White House Summit on Working Families scheduled for June, plans to use the report as a call to action.

“It wasn’t an academic exercise, it was organizing exercise,” she says of the report. “Women in the states are using it to tell our story and to find solutions. The report helps us to really focus in on income inequality efforts that were working on and to do so from a black women’s perspective.”

E. Faye Williams, chairwomen of the National Congress of Black Women, Inc. was among the women present at the White House last month when http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/04/08/taking-action-honor-national-equal-pay-day" rel="nofollow - President Obama signed an executive order strengthening enforcement of equal pay laws by federal contractors. She says the work of her organization and national affiliates often fly under the radar of media that don’t see black women’s issues as mainstream issues.

“We don’t have as much access to the press and are rarely asked our opinions about these issues,” she says.

Black women, particularly those who aren’t white-collar professionals, experience the unfairness of unequal pay on a different level than white women who earn less than their male counterparts. While black women earn on average $599 weekly compared to $665 earned by black men, the pay gap between them is much smaller because black men’s earnings are also lower than that of white men and women. African American women are paid 89 percent of what African American men are paid, but just 64 percent of what white men are paid, according to the American Association of University Women’s (AAUW) annual report, “ http://www.aauw.org/2014/04/03/race-and-the-gender-wage-gap/" rel="nofollow - The Simple Truth .”

Additionally, the 12.4 percent black male unemployment rate is nearly double the national unemployment rate of 6.7 percent and considerably higher than the rate for white (5.8 percent ), http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t03.htm" rel="nofollow - Hispanic (7.9 percent ) and Asian ( 5.4 percent) males., http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm" rel="nofollow - according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics .

Building and maintaining strong black families, especially those not headed by two working parents, requires lots of focus and energy at a time when those families are still teetering from the aftereffects of http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/11/05/the-great-recession-may-have-crushed-americas-economic-potential/" rel="nofollow - The Great Recession So it’s a good thing that black women’s pay is being discussed at all, even if they aren’t the ones leading the discussion. Still, it’s important that they stay involved in the fight, says Carol Joyner, director of the Labor Project for Working Families and a member of the Black Women’s Roundtable.

“You do see organizations headed by white women disproportionately represented but there are lots of women of color behind them,” she says. “It’s important to look at the whole picture, who’s behind the message and engaged on these issues. There are huge coalitions working behind the scenes and many have people of color leading them on these issues; the justice and civil rights groups, the labor unions as well.”

“These distinctions about the racial income gap are being made because there are more women of color involved in these conversations, and increasingly engaged on these issues,” she says. “This is an opportunity and a moment for white-led advocacy groups to diversify their hiring practices but it’s also an opportunity for more groups led by people of color to make equal pay and other working family issues one of their core issues.”




Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:50pm
Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


don't see how it is condescending

seems factual



I think telling someone they'll understand when they have a "real job" or start their career or have "real" experience is condescending. If a person has worked for pay at any time in their life they 1)have had a real job and 2)have likely already experienced wage discrimination. Therefore they've had enough experience to form an opinion on how they see the issue in relation to themselves.

Modeless isn't a 13 year old with no job experience. She's a grown up who has received a paycheck at some point in her life. No need to automatically discount her perspective just because you (general you) don't feel it's "real" enough.



Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 3:51pm
Originally posted by EPITOME EPITOME wrote:

Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

I think chalking the perspective up to ignorance and a lack of "real world" experience is condescending.



telling someone they simply don't work hard enough when they do the same work is condescending. it's the same logic used to counter Affirmative Action, fair pay acts, minimum wage, or most social programs....etc. etc.


I don't disagree with you.

They're both condescending.


Posted By: Diane (35)
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:00pm
SL they cant be "new woman" cause that may be confused with man-made women, they need a better name.

I need a topic to write on maybe this should be it *deep sigh*


Posted By: maysay1
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:03pm
I think it depends on how you view the world.

For me, the choices I make on an individual level are far more important to my activism. So it's not strange at all to me to say that certain things aren't worth it because no one has unlimited energy.



Posted By: _ConcreteRose_
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:04pm
I took a class that focused partly on salary negotiation. You want to get paid? Rule number 1 is be informed. That's why i can't get behind this whole"mind your business" thing. It takes you no where and makes your salary negotiation tactic suffer. Negotiate both hard and soft benefits.


Posted By: Diane (35)
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:12pm
Originally posted by rickysrose rickysrose wrote:

I'd tell a personal story about how I learned and profited in this Corp pay game but bhm isnt quite the place



why not? come on i have a box of east indian mangos in the kitchen, i'll send you 2. you (and others) drop hints abt corp. culture/playing in the YT man's world /advice to others all the time. and you know i love a good story.


Posted By: _ConcreteRose_
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:14pm
Originally posted by maysay1 maysay1 wrote:

I think it depends on how you view the world.

For me, the choices I make on an individual level are far more important to my activism. So it's not strange at all to me to say that certain things aren't worth it because no one has unlimited energy.


I agree with this. But this woman placed importance on this issue in her life, that's why its kind of pointless to try to govern what others do like modeless is attempting with her first post. I think there would be a different reaction if she said, "i personally put more importance on things other than salary."


Posted By: Tbaby
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:14pm
I got to chime in here, too. 

Accepting the "status quo" that women get paid less because "that's the way things are" or that we "should mind our own biz" is borders on mental "laziness".  Why should I accept injustice just because its too hard for me to change things?  Mentality like that will keep you always in last place in the race of life....

I want to finish first.


Posted By: Diane (35)
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 4:15pm
Originally posted by JasmineE02 JasmineE02 wrote:

And it happens everywhere.  My organization is for women and run by women....the handful of men employed there still get paid more. Stern Smile  I'm waiting for ish to go down.  LOL

ShockedShockedShockedShockedShockedShockedShocked 

rockstone SL is on it. I may not have to play race but i'll be playing darkie with natural hair to the brown man with "good hair". And lord knows its 10 girls for everyone 1 dude in my fieldCry


Posted By: ms_wonderland
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:00pm
wb RR Party


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:01pm
diane you know bhm can be messy lol

I'm a bhm addict, I told myself I'd only peek in on the Solange situation and I've been here all day :(




Posted By: Diane (35)
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:02pm
RR just either say it was a friend, drop the amount you got or say it was a dream LOLOL


Posted By: ragincajin
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:37pm
Excuses. Excuses.
Back in the day they used to say, "The man has a family to support. That's why he's paid more."
But, with the advent of divorce, that sweet little lie no longer held up.
My favorite is the egalitarian lie: "It's knowledge, skills and ability that we look to. Nothing else."
Another lie that ran out of steam when experienced women continued to fall under par for male salaries.
Ah white males...the brand that just won't quit fuc*ing the masses.
Heart attacks to you all.



Posted By: f8dagrate
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:39pm
Originally posted by ragincajin ragincajin wrote:

Excuses. Excuses.
Back in the day they used to say, "The man has a family to support. That's why he's paid more."
But, with the advent of divorce, that sweet little lie no longer held up.
My favorite is the egalitarian lie: "It's knowledge, skills and ability that we look to. Nothing else."
Another lie that ran out of steam when experienced women continued to fall under par for male salaries.
Ah white males...the brand that just won't quit fuc*ing the masses.
Heart attacks to you all.



LOL


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:44pm
thx ms_w!

Or someone hacked me? The story isn't even that good


Posted By: ragincajin
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:49pm
Originally posted by f8dagrate f8dagrate wrote:

Originally posted by ragincajin ragincajin wrote:

Excuses. Excuses.
Back in the day they used to say, "The man has a family to support. That's why he's paid more."
But, with the advent of divorce, that sweet little lie no longer held up.
My favorite is the egalitarian lie: "It's knowledge, skills and ability that we look to. Nothing else."
Another lie that ran out of steam when experienced women continued to fall under par for male salaries.
Ah white males...the brand that just won't quit fuc*ing the masses.
Heart attacks to you all.



LOL

LOLLOL
Now let me take my azz to the airport.
Peace everybody.


Posted By: rickysrose
Date Posted: May 16 2014 at 6:53pm
anyone who gets a paycheck should want to be paid on par with colleagues doing the same work 

It should be natural to do what you can to make that happen

Theres no house note, car note, tax, phone/light bill discount for being a woman or black... there shouldn't be an automatic deduction in pay for being black or a woman 








Print Page | Close Window