When
examining this idea of a war on women, I repeatedly came across the same
statistic: that women earn 77 cents for every dollar that men make. After giving
this statistic, many of these sources that I looked at came to the conclusion
that there must be gender discrimination, and that there really is a war on
women. However, I am not convinced.
This
statistic fails to take into account the number of hours worked, the amount of
training/experience that workers have, and what type of work these laborers do.
If all these things were constant between men and women and there was still a
pay gap, then I would definitely argue that there is a war on women, but this
is not the case. This statistic ultimately compares work that is not
comparable, because these factors are so different.
In
an article from the Heritage Foundation, I
learned that there is, in fact, a great difference between the type of work
that women and men do. For example, women make up only 17 percent of all
engineers and 75 percent of all social workers. On average, engineers earn
$117,849 while social workers make $79,569. Because so many more women choose
to work in the fields that traditionally earn less (childcare, nursing, etc.), of course there is going to be a pay gap.
In
fact, when the Heritage Foundation analyzed federal workers, there was
virtually no pay difference among those in the same profession. Female
engineers, for example, earned 95 percent as much as male engineers while
female social workers made 97 percent as much as their male counterparts. These
statistics don't even take into account differences in experience, hours worked
(including overtime pay), or other wage-affecting factors. So when men and
women who work in the same field are compared with one another, this pay gap
decreases significantly.
In
general, there is also a large difference in the amount of hours worked between
men and the women. In his article Statistical Frauds, economist Thomas
Sowell wrote that he discovered, in his research, that the average female
doctor works 500 hours less per year than the average male doctor. So when studies
claim that women are paid so much less than men, we must read the fine print
and determine whether or not the work is comparable. In addition, Sowell points
out that women often take time off from their careers, or choose a job with
more flexible hours at the expense of their careers, in order to make more time
for family.
Women
should be applauded for putting family first in many cases, and often at the
expense of career. Families with young children especially, need at least
one parent to have reasonable working hours and flexibility in schedule. At
least one parent needs to be home enough to provide the support and guidance that kids need growing up. Someone has to find the time to do all
the things that keep a household running—shopping, cooking, cleaning, laundry,
etc. In our society that role has traditionally fallen on women. Often, women make
the choice to take on this role and sacrifice their careers. While personal
sacrifice to do what is best for the family is selfless and admirable, it is
also a partial explanation for pay inequality between men and women. Women who make the choice to have a family and fill the primary caretaker role
cannot fairly demand to be paid the same as their counterparts who have focused
more on their careers.
On
the other hand, we cannot dismiss the fact that among some companies and
careers, there likely is a bias against women. The term “old boys network”
probably has some truth to it in certain male dominated fields where women have
been traditionally excluded. Fortunately this seems to be
changing. In an article from Forbes, I
learned that the CEOs of GM, Hewlett Packard, IBM, and Pepsico are all women. Granted, women CEOs make up only 4% of the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, but
it does show a gradual acceptance of women as leaders in business that is
beginning to take place.