A FEDERAL COURT HAS RULED THAT EMPLOYERS CAN PAY
WOMEN LESS THAN MEN AS LONG AS THEIR PREVIOUS BOSSES DID TOO.
THERE ARE RULES THERE ñ THEY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE
PREVIOUS SALARY AND EACH YEAR
THEY CAN ADD 5%.
AFTER WORKING FOR THREE YEARS AT THIS COMPANY,
THIS WOMAN FOUND THAT HER SALARY WAS LOWER THAN ALL THE OTHER
MALE MATH CONSULTANTS, EVEN THE ONES WHO HAD JUST STARTED.
THE
JUDGE AT THE TIME REALIZED THAT THIS WAS FRAUGHT AT THE RISK ñ
EVEN IF THIS WAS NOT BASED IN DISCRIMINATORY BUSINESS
PRACTICES, IT WILL PERPETUATE THEM IF YOU TAKE THEM INTO
ACCOUNT WHEN ASSESSING THE
SALARY FOR NEW FEMALE EMPLOYEES.
CITIES LIKE PHILADELPHIA, NEW
YORK CITY, AND MASSACHUSETTS HAVE LEGISLATION THAT BARS
EMPLOYERS FROM ASKING ABOUT PAST SALARIES, BUT NOT EVERY STATE
DOES.
>> DON'T TELL A MAN TO RELAX.
>> I'M HOPING THEY ARE GOING TO REEVALUATE.
>> THEY ARE BRINGING THIS BACK TO THE ORIGINAL COURT THAT MADE
THE DECISION.
WHEN THEY WANTED
TO HAVE HAPPEN WAS THEY LOOKED AT THE RULING AND SAID GUYS,
WHAT YOU ARE DOING IS BASING THE PAY OF YOUR CURRENT EMPLOYEES ON
THE COMPENSATION THEY GOT THEIR
LAST JOB.
IF YOU DO THAT YOU ARE JUST KICKING THE CAN OF UNEQUAL
PAY ALONG.
WHAT THE DIFFERENCE
IS IN THE EQUAL PAY ACT THERE IS
FOR EXCEPTIONS, ONE IS
SENIORITY, THE OTHER IS MERIT, QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF
PRODUCTION, AND THE OTHER ONE IS ANY OTHER FACTOR THAN SEX.
IN A
PREVIOUS DECISION IN AN ALLSTATE LAWSUIT, THEY WERE ABLE TO SAY
WELL, THE OTHER THING OTHER THAN
SEX WAS PREVIOUS COMPENSATION.
IT GETS REALLY DICEY ON WHO THE
BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON.
THEN THE SCHOOL BOARD SAID THERE IS FOR
REASONS WHY NOT.
THE LOWER COURT SAID THAT IS NOT FAIR YOU SHOULD
BE PAID EQUAL FOR EQUAL WORK.
IT
STILL WOULD BE WAY COOLER AND
EASIER IF THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT SAID LET'S BE ADULTS AND
REALIZE THAT IF YOU ARE BASING IT ON PAST SALARY YOU ARE JUST
REINFORCING THE LEGACY OF UNEQUAL PAY.
>> IT WOULD BE MUCH COOLER, PHARAOH, AND MORE 21ST-CENTURY
IF THEY WERE ABLE TO GO ALONG WITH SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE
EQUAL PAY.
IT IS BAFFLING THAT THIS DECISION WAS ONLY MADE IN
2015, AND PEOPLE WERE STILL ñ HOW MANY PEOPLE THINK THAT OF
ALL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD WOULD THINK GOOGLE WOULD BE
DISCRIMINATORY.
BUT THE FACT IS THAT THIS IS STILL BEING MET
WITH SOME SORT OF CONFLICT.
THIS DECISION STILL IS NOT FINALIZED.
JUST BECAUSE SOME PREVIOUS
COMPANY SAID I'M NOT GOING TO PAY YOU AS MUCH ñ
>> THE HIGHER COURT IS GOING TO THE LOWER COURT AND SAYING MAKE
SURE THEIR JUSTIFICATION IS NOT BULL SHIT.
THE HIGHER COURT IS
SAYING THESE PEOPLE SAID IT IS BASED ON YOUR PREVIOUS EARNINGS.
AND THE HIGHER COURT IS SAYING MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT JUST BULL
SHITTING ABOUT THAT.
>>YES, IN SOME CASES PEOPLE ARE BLATANTLY SEXIST BUT A LOT OF
THE TIME IT IS SUBCONSCIOUS.
I THINK
THERE IS DIFFERENT WAYS
THAT WE CAN ATTACK THIS, ONE ACCEPTING AT THE WAGE GAP EXISTS
AND THAT IT IS NOT A MYTH WHICH IS SOMETHING YOU WOULD BE
SURPRISED HOW MANY PEOPLE STILL
BELIEVE.
AND THE OTHER COMPONENT IS WE KNOW THIS IS AN ISSUE,
LET'S LOOK AT THIS WITHIN OUR
COMPANY AND MAYBE TAKE A MINOR HIT WHEN IT COMES TO PROFIT.
LET'S FIX OUR COUNTRY.
THIS IS
SO MESSED UP.
>> IT IS TALL TO ASKED ANY COMPANY TO ADJUST THEIR
BOTTOM-LINE UNLESS THEY HAVE TO.
>> MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE THAT ALL THE OTHER CARVEOUTS FOR THE
INTENT ñ THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE EQUAL PAY ACT WORK.
THIS ONE
DOESN'T.
IF HANNAH MAKES MORE THAN ME BECAUSE SHE SELLS MORE
WIDGETS THAN I DO, THE QUALITY
OF WORK AND QUANTITY.
THIS IS SHE WAS IN THE BREAK ROOM WITH
HER MALE COLLEAGUES AND THEY
WERE ALL LIKE WE ARE ALL THE SAME LEVEL WITH THE SAME
EXPERIENCE ñ
>>SOME OF THEM WERE LOWER LEVEL WITH LESS EXPERIENCE.
>>I WOULD ALSO SAY THERE IS AN ILLUSION ñ THEY SAY IT IS
OBJECTIVE.
YOU GET HIRED WHERE YOU GET HIRED.
BUT THEY ARE
PAYING PEOPLE LESS IF THEY CAN, AND THIS IS A JOB WHERE ANY
OTHER FACTOR THAN SEX IS SO
OPEN-ENDED.
DEFINITELY SHOULD NOT BE ON PAR ARE MEASURED BY
YOUR PREVIOUS COMPENSATION.
>> I THINK YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT AND I WANT TO ILLUMINATE.
WHEN
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PROCESSES
THAT ARE SET IN STONE, THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT WHEN
YOU START WITH A LOWER SALARY.
THERE ARE TONS OF STUDIES OUT
THERE THAT PROVE THAT THE FIRST YEAR OUT OF COLLEGE OR GRAD
SCHOOL THERE IS STILL A HUGE GAP BETWEEN WHAT MEN MAKE AND WHAT
WOMEN MAKE.
IT ONLY WIDENS AS THEY CONTINUE TO WORK IN THE
WORKFORCE.
EVEN IF THEY ARE ON
THE SAME TRAJECTORY OR WHATEVER, THERE IS A HUGE GAP AND IT IS
FROM THE VERY SECOND REGARDLESS
OF THEIR EXPERIENCE OR EDUCATION, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
I
HOPE THAT WHEN THIS GOES BACK TO
THE COURT THEY FIGURE OUT THAT THIS IS A WAY JUST FOR OTHER
PEOPLE TO PERPETUATE THIS GENDER
DISCRIMINATION.