Women dont bring in anywhere close to the amount that men bring in, when it comes to profit. A small mom and pop store that makes 100k a year profit cant pay employees the same as a company that makes 50 million a year.
1 Like
I had that happen once too. They did a giant survey thatâs like once every 5 years and sorted it all out. It wasnât much, I think 13 dollars a check, but itâs something. heh
1 Like
If women were actually paid less companies would hire on all women, thatâs how they all operate, on profits.
3 Likes
This has happened as professions that shift from male based to female based the salaries stagnate. This has been well studied. Here is an example.
1 Like
I agree with you 100% but while this issue is still sitting up amongst the professional athletes it might be good if they had a taste of this âequityâ for themselves. It might be worth applying this standard to Lebron James and take his salary down and bring up Candace Parker or Brittney Grinnerâs salaries. Grinner makes about 107k a year, Lebron makes about 40 mil, so Lebron would lose half his salary. Then we can ask him how he likes it, if that was the right thing to do.
1 Like
I mean, I looked into it, and it turns out both menâs and womenâs teams were paid the same amount per game, but the women negotiated a salary based pay and the men had some kind of pay-to-play contract. So the dispute came when the women performed better back in 2018 but were still paid the same amount as the men.
So let me get this straight, the owners of the Lakers should not pay his people as much, even though they make him way more profit. And he should give money to a different owner so he can pay his people that dont make as much, more???
You realize how stupid that sounds? Walmart should totally stop paying its employees 17hr and the money they save should be given to a dollar store because they dont make as muchâŚ
So thatâs the mens fault right? Those men negotiating for better deals how dare they!!!
1 Like
Read what I was responding to. I agree with you, I do not think it is a good idea, but if they want to play this equal pay game, I suggest we start with the highest of the high, and the ones who seem to clamor for this sort of thing. Have them put their money where their mouth is.
Whatâs happening here is they are turning up the temp a little bit at a time and boiling the frog so he doesnât know it. If we start up at the top, and do this in a shocking way, people will reject these ideas and jump out of the pot 
A lawsuit can âsayâ whatever it wants. That doesnât mean it is true or supported by evidence.
Not only does the state have to prove disparities in pay, they have to prove that gender was the reason for those disparities. Even if all males made $5/hr more per hour than every female, you cannot prove the reason is gender just because that disparity exists.
No, Iâm just pointing out it wasnât about profits, it was as you say, the men apparently negotiated a better contract.
A lot of companies consider telling people your salary a punishable offense. This is because they negotiate every salary individually and try to pay every employee the least amount of money they will accept.
Itâs a sad truth, but promotion and salary usually have very little to do with contribution and competency. They are mostly based on ambition, aggressiveness in negotiation, sneakiness and backstabbing office politics, and how good someone is at self promotion.
If you donât schmooze and demand a better salary itâs usually not just going to fall out of the sky. Everyone has to laugh at their dumb bosses jokes.
The mens team could negotiate because of they were pulling in $$$. If you were hiring someone and they said, yeah I got some skills, your going to have to train me, I am not going to make your company as much money, and then candidate B shows up and says âhey, I have a proven background that you will get your moneyâs worth from me and more.â Which one are you more inclined to listen to when they ask for a larger then normal salary?
Yeap, some shifts get paid more too. Shifts that women are statistically less likely to take as they are more likely to be caregivers at home.
2 Likes
Reading a document is not equivalent to knowing how the legal system works.
You guys keep saying they wouldnt be pursuing if there wasnt something to stand on. Thats false. Just look at the Rittenhouse case. Clear cut case of self defense yet the prosecution is going all out with absolutely nothing just trying to do anything to get him on something.
No, CA didnt spend 2 whole years combing through books. Just because something spans 2 years doesnt mean that it took the entire 2 years.
I also take it that you never put in a complaint on a product. Whoever pays them is who the investigators side with. And if its the tax payers that fund it, congrats you just created the court system where the judge and jury should be impartial, so if that system already exists then whats the point of 3rd party HR?
2 Likes