Total Posts:42|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Women Workers

timbeech
Posts: 948
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2011 3:50:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
According to the United States Department of Labor...

Top 5 Occupations of US women.

1. Secretaries and administrative assistants, 3,074,000
2. Registered nurses, 2,612,000
3. Elementary and middle school teachers, 2,343,000
4. Cashiers, 2,273,000
5. Nursing, psychiatric, and home health aides, 1,770,000

Does this not factor into the wage disparity we always here about? The glass ceiling is another name for it.

What do you all think?
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2011 4:10:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
wow such an original argument /end sarcasm

while i agree for the most part, you also have to consider that many times women will be pushed towards these professions rather than simply choosing them for themselves (though thats also a large factor).

for example, i am studying biochemistry in order to work in a lab after i graduate and i was told by someone that i should just try and be a nurse instead because working in a lab sucks. wtf world! if i had been a man i am almost certain he wouldn't have suggested that to me.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2011 4:13:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
These statistics don't really surprise me, considering women do dominate the service industry. It may be due to our maternal instincts or perhaps something else, I'm not really sure.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2011 10:07:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/23/2011 3:50:37 PM, timbeech wrote:
Does this not factor into the wage disparity we always here about? The glass ceiling is another name for it.

The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.
President of DDO
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/23/2011 10:58:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/23/2011 10:07:42 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 2/23/2011 3:50:37 PM, timbeech wrote:
Does this not factor into the wage disparity we always here about? The glass ceiling is another name for it.

The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.

Right on the money.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 4:33:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/23/2011 10:07:42 PM, Danielle wrote:
At 2/23/2011 3:50:37 PM, timbeech wrote:
Does this not factor into the wage disparity we always here about? The glass ceiling is another name for it.

The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.

Of course any company who discriminates like this is already punishing themselves financially.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 5:07:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 4:33:29 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.

Of course any company who discriminates like this is already punishing themselves financially.

Not necessarily, for example their clients/customers may also discriminate on the same basis.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 7:20:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 5:07:26 AM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 4:33:29 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.

Of course any company who discriminates like this is already punishing themselves financially.

Not necessarily, for example their clients/customers may also discriminate on the same basis.

My criterion for the best candidate would be the one who provides the most output. If the consumers are descriminate in such a way that makes one gender provide more output, then the best candidates would be members of that gender.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 11:23:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I tried to search the top 5 occupations for men and couldn't find a statistic. Let's be clear that this is a one sided statistic.

In the stores where all the women are cashiers i'm betting that all the people stocking the shelves are men.
Where all the women are administrative assistants men are in shipping and receiving.
There are probably more male nurses then female garbage removal people.
It is true that the top execs in the country are men, but i am fairly confident that those numbers are rapidly shifting, whereas i don't think the numbers of women looking to pick up trash is changing all that much.

I really hate statistics that are used to make points because it's a shallow piece of evidence, at least often.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 11:36:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 7:20:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 2/24/2011 5:07:26 AM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 4:33:29 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.

Of course any company who discriminates like this is already punishing themselves financially.

Not necessarily, for example their clients/customers may also discriminate on the same basis.

My criterion for the best candidate would be the one who provides the most output. If the consumers are descriminate in such a way that makes one gender provide more output, then the best candidates would be members of that gender.

So discrimination is fine so long as it is profitable?
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 11:39:41 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 11:23:30 AM, innomen wrote:
I tried to search the top 5 occupations for men and couldn't find a statistic. Let's be clear that this is a one sided statistic.

In the stores where all the women are cashiers i'm betting that all the people stocking the shelves are men.
Where all the women are administrative assistants men are in shipping and receiving.
There are probably more male nurses then female garbage removal people.
It is true that the top execs in the country are men, but i am fairly confident that those numbers are rapidly shifting, whereas i don't think the numbers of women looking to pick up trash is changing all that much.

I really hate statistics that are used to make points because it's a shallow piece of evidence, at least often.

If you look at any bank, the tellers tend to be women, while branch managers tend to be men (and there are equal number of male and female personal bankers, but males tend to be promoted from teller to personal banker much younger and more quickly). That's just one anecdotal example though...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 11:59:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 11:39:41 AM, nonentity wrote:
At 2/24/2011 11:23:30 AM, innomen wrote:
I tried to search the top 5 occupations for men and couldn't find a statistic. Let's be clear that this is a one sided statistic.

In the stores where all the women are cashiers i'm betting that all the people stocking the shelves are men.
Where all the women are administrative assistants men are in shipping and receiving.
There are probably more male nurses then female garbage removal people.
It is true that the top execs in the country are men, but i am fairly confident that those numbers are rapidly shifting, whereas i don't think the numbers of women looking to pick up trash is changing all that much.

I really hate statistics that are used to make points because it's a shallow piece of evidence, at least often.

If you look at any bank, the tellers tend to be women, while branch managers tend to be men (and there are equal number of male and female personal bankers, but males tend to be promoted from teller to personal banker much younger and more quickly). That's just one anecdotal example though...

Yeah, that's anecdotal because i've seen plenty of female bank managers, and plenty of male tellers. I don't know if the number of applicants to be managers is skewed either. We are assuming that there is a 50 50 male to female number of applicants to a given position.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 2:38:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 11:36:12 AM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 7:20:45 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 2/24/2011 5:07:26 AM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 4:33:29 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
The Glass Ceiling is not another name for wage disparity. It refers to a situation in which a person is not promoted past a certain point specifically based on some form of discrimination. That is not the same thing as women choosing lower-paying jobs. It can, however, refer to different pay for comparable work.

Of course any company who discriminates like this is already punishing themselves financially.

Not necessarily, for example their clients/customers may also discriminate on the same basis.

My criterion for the best candidate would be the one who provides the most output. If the consumers are descriminate in such a way that makes one gender provide more output, then the best candidates would be members of that gender.

So discrimination is fine so long as it is profitable?

i think the point is that in that case it wouldn't really be discrimination, because the person thats best for the job is the one that produces the most output, regardless of gender. the fact that it effectively favors one gender over another is an irrelevant side effect.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 2:44:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 2:38:52 PM, belle wrote:

i think the point is that in that case it wouldn't really be discrimination, because the person thats best for the job is the one that produces the most output, regardless of gender. the fact that it effectively favors one gender over another is an irrelevant side effect.

So discrimination isn't discrimination so long as it's profitable?
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 2:50:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 2:44:28 PM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 2:38:52 PM, belle wrote:

i think the point is that in that case it wouldn't really be discrimination, because the person thats best for the job is the one that produces the most output, regardless of gender. the fact that it effectively favors one gender over another is an irrelevant side effect.

So discrimination isn't discrimination so long as it's profitable?

discrimination isn't unfair so long as its profitable. the best candidate for the job presumably has lots of qualities that allow an employer to discriminate between them and other candidates. the negative part of discrimination arises when qualities that aren't relevant to job performance are used as criteria for employee selection. if gender is relevant to job performance then the discrimination is justified. and yes i am using discriminate in its wider rather than narrow, negatively connoted, sense. i couldn't think of a better word to use for "justified discrimination (in the sense of being choosey) between various candidates".
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:01:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 2:50:25 PM, belle wrote:
At 2/24/2011 2:44:28 PM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 2:38:52 PM, belle wrote:

i think the point is that in that case it wouldn't really be discrimination, because the person thats best for the job is the one that produces the most output, regardless of gender. the fact that it effectively favors one gender over another is an irrelevant side effect.

So discrimination isn't discrimination so long as it's profitable?

discrimination isn't unfair so long as its profitable. the best candidate for the job presumably has lots of qualities that allow an employer to discriminate between them and other candidates. the negative part of discrimination arises when qualities that aren't relevant to job performance are used as criteria for employee selection. if gender is relevant to job performance then the discrimination is justified. and yes i am using discriminate in its wider rather than narrow, negatively connoted, sense. i couldn't think of a better word to use for "justified discrimination (in the sense of being choosey) between various candidates".

This. It isn't really discrimination to hire all female writers for vogue magezine. They provide a better output.
If it really is a massive problem to you, the only fair way to change things is to change the way the consumer thinks, not the market.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:03:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 2:50:25 PM, belle wrote:

discrimination isn't unfair so long as its profitable. the best candidate for the job presumably has lots of qualities that allow an employer to discriminate between them and other candidates. the negative part of discrimination arises when qualities that aren't relevant to job performance are used as criteria for employee selection. if gender is relevant to job performance then the discrimination is justified. and yes i am using discriminate in its wider rather than narrow, negatively connoted, sense. i couldn't think of a better word to use for "justified discrimination (in the sense of being choosey) between various candidates".

Let's try an example.

Suppose a woman is applying for a job as a financial advisor and is more qualified and capable than her male competitors. However the firm looking to hire has done market research indicating that their clients have more faith in male financial advisors than female ones, so she doesn't get the job.

That's fair?
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:07:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:03:17 PM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 2:50:25 PM, belle wrote:

discrimination isn't unfair so long as its profitable. the best candidate for the job presumably has lots of qualities that allow an employer to discriminate between them and other candidates. the negative part of discrimination arises when qualities that aren't relevant to job performance are used as criteria for employee selection. if gender is relevant to job performance then the discrimination is justified. and yes i am using discriminate in its wider rather than narrow, negatively connoted, sense. i couldn't think of a better word to use for "justified discrimination (in the sense of being choosey) between various candidates".

Let's try an example.

Suppose a woman is applying for a job as a financial advisor and is more qualified and capable than her male competitors. However the firm looking to hire has done market research indicating that their clients have more faith in male financial advisors than female ones, so she doesn't get the job.

That's fair?

Yes, if its true, and the value of client trust outweighs her benefits. If she is trusted less (and we are assuming here that trust is a significant criterion) then she is a worse candidate.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:09:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I have been skimming over this thread, and thought of something. What if two equally qualified people apply for the same position. One is a white male and the other is a woman or a minority. Which one would you hire?
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:10:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:01:37 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
It isn't really discrimination to hire all female writers for vogue magezine. They provide a better output.

What can a woman do that a gay man or transexual can't?

If it really is a massive problem to you, the only fair way to change things is to change the way the consumer thinks, not the market.

It's not really a problem to me personally, I'm a white male after all. I think things are effed up but I'm far too apathetic and hypocritical to start a revolution myself.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:11:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:09:38 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I have been skimming over this thread, and thought of something. What if two equally qualified people apply for the same position. One is a white male and the other is a woman or a minority. Which one would you hire?

No-one is equally qualified. However, assuming they are, I would use a random number generator, seeing as the choice won't affect output.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:12:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:10:15 PM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 3:01:37 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
It isn't really discrimination to hire all female writers for vogue magezine. They provide a better output.

What can a woman do that a gay man or transexual can't?

If it really is a massive problem to you, the only fair way to change things is to change the way the consumer thinks, not the market.

It's not really a problem to me personally, I'm a white male after all. I think things are effed up but I'm far too apathetic and hypocritical to start a revolution myself.

I made an assumption that women are better writers to make an example. They may well hire gays/trans people too, I don't know. But it would be silly to hire lots of straight guys, even if they are talented writers as their output would be worth less.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:13:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:11:06 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 2/24/2011 3:09:38 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I have been skimming over this thread, and thought of something. What if two equally qualified people apply for the same position. One is a white male and the other is a woman or a minority. Which one would you hire?

No-one is equally qualified. However, assuming they are, I would use a random number generator, seeing as the choice won't affect output.

At least it's good to know you wouldn't favour the white male in that scenario because that would definitely be discrimination.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:13:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
To clarify;
They aren't looking for the most talented candidate, but the one who will do the best job (provide most output for cost). Often the they are one and the same, but not necessarily. If the female candidate does a worse job, even though she has more talent, then she is not desirable over the male candidate.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:15:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:09:38 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I have been skimming over this thread, and thought of something. What if two equally qualified people apply for the same position. One is a white male and the other is a woman or a minority. Which one would you hire?

I'd hire the woman if she was pretty and the man if she was not he he.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:16:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:13:58 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
To clarify;
They aren't looking for the most talented candidate, but the one who will do the best job (provide most output for cost). Often the they are one and the same, but not necessarily. If the female candidate does a worse job, even though she has more talent, then she is not desirable over the male candidate.

There would be no way to know that though until after you hire the person.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/24/2011 3:36:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:16:05 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 2/24/2011 3:13:58 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
To clarify;
They aren't looking for the most talented candidate, but the one who will do the best job (provide most output for cost). Often the they are one and the same, but not necessarily. If the female candidate does a worse job, even though she has more talent, then she is not desirable over the male candidate.

There would be no way to know that though until after you hire the person.

Not true. You can tell to a certain extent.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2011 12:36:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/24/2011 3:03:17 PM, feverish wrote:
At 2/24/2011 2:50:25 PM, belle wrote:

discrimination isn't unfair so long as its profitable. the best candidate for the job presumably has lots of qualities that allow an employer to discriminate between them and other candidates. the negative part of discrimination arises when qualities that aren't relevant to job performance are used as criteria for employee selection. if gender is relevant to job performance then the discrimination is justified. and yes i am using discriminate in its wider rather than narrow, negatively connoted, sense. i couldn't think of a better word to use for "justified discrimination (in the sense of being choosey) between various candidates".

Let's try an example.

Suppose a woman is applying for a job as a financial advisor and is more qualified and capable than her male competitors. However the firm looking to hire has done market research indicating that their clients have more faith in male financial advisors than female ones, so she doesn't get the job.

That's fair?

yeah, if they honestly think the downside to having a less competent employee is outweighed by the upside of more favorable initial impressions by investors. my guess is that in such a case they would be overestimating prejudice and underestimating the desire of investors for large returns... but its not really possible to prove them wrong. if they succeed, good for them. if they fail, oh well.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
Caramel
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2011 1:09:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/23/2011 3:50:37 PM, timbeech wrote:
According to the United States Department of Labor...

Top 5 Occupations of US women.

1. Secretaries and administrative assistants, 3,074,000
2. Registered nurses, 2,612,000
3. Elementary and middle school teachers, 2,343,000
4. Cashiers, 2,273,000
5. Nursing, psychiatric, and home health aides, 1,770,000

Does this not factor into the wage disparity we always here about? The glass ceiling is another name for it.

What do you all think?

I think that Innomen is right in the sense that guys get crap jobs too. I think he is a bit optimistic about them "rapidlly shifting" into top exec positions though("Currently, 15 FORTUNE 500 companies are run by women, and a total of 28 FORTUNE 1000 companies have women in the top job").

The only real problem is that we make the women work at all - particularly those bearing children.
no comment
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/25/2011 3:55:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 2/25/2011 1:09:26 AM, Caramel wrote:
At 2/23/2011 3:50:37 PM, timbeech wrote:
According to the United States Department of Labor...

Top 5 Occupations of US women.

1. Secretaries and administrative assistants, 3,074,000
2. Registered nurses, 2,612,000
3. Elementary and middle school teachers, 2,343,000
4. Cashiers, 2,273,000
5. Nursing, psychiatric, and home health aides, 1,770,000

Does this not factor into the wage disparity we always here about? The glass ceiling is another name for it.

What do you all think?

I think that Innomen is right in the sense that guys get crap jobs too. I think he is a bit optimistic about them "rapidlly shifting" into top exec positions though("Currently, 15 FORTUNE 500 companies are run by women, and a total of 28 FORTUNE 1000 companies have women in the top job").

The only real problem is that we make the women work at all - particularly those bearing children.

Could you clarify this statement, especially the make.