The gender pay gap

March 9th, 2010 at 8:28 am by David Farrar

NZPA report:

A new study of graduates with bachelor degrees has revealed that men start earning more than women a year after starting work.

Women’s Affairs Minister Pansy Wong said today her ministry’s study used data from Inland Revenue and looked at the difference between the income of male and female graduates between one and five years after they started their employment.

The pay gap started developing from the first year, and after five years it ranged between 1 percent and 20 percent, with the biggest difference in management and commerce.

“While the income gap varies between different fields of study, no matter what area of study is pursued an income gap has emerged between men and women … and it is quite a significant gap,” Ms Wong said.

“The bottom line is that a bachelor’s degree held by a woman should be worth the same in the marketplace as one held by a man.”

It is disappointing there is a pay gap between male and female graduates, so soon after entering the work force.

The fact that overall average female pay rates are only 88% of male pay rates, has never convinced me this is due to discrimination.  The reality that many women take time out of the workforce when their children are young, makes it unlikely one will ever have the average pay rates the same. There is also the issue of different professions having different gender compositions.

So in a way the overall average pay rates for men and women, are not very useful – just as overall crime rates are also not very useful.

But the study referred to by Pansy Wong, does lend credence to the theory that there is discrimination in pay rates. You would expect a female and male commerce graduate who both enter the same profession to be attracting the same pay rates – at least in the initial years.

The ministry was using the extra $2 million it was being given over four years to increase its ability to address the gender pay gap, she said.

Part of this would be the ministry working with universities to recruit up to 6000 students graduating this year who would be tracked over the next 10 years.

That would also be worthwhile research – far better to track a large group of students, than merely to just compare the average wages over all occupations.

I’m generally reluctant to conclude discrimination, and look for other factors, because discrimination is just so plain stupid. I can’t understand how anyone would think someone is more or less capable in a job because of their gender, and would pay them less. Mind you, I think the discrimination might be subconscious, rather than a conscious decision.

Tags:

46 Responses to “The gender pay gap”

  1. wreck1080 (3,522 comments) says:

    Maybe women are just not aggressive enough in their pay demands?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. MT_Tinman (2,790 comments) says:

    Of course it could just be that men, as a group, simply prove themselves better in the fields of management and commerce than women and earn their larger salaries.

    [DPF: That *could* be a factor but the fact you get a pay gap after just one year makes me doubt it]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. eszett (2,264 comments) says:

    Maybe women tend to take the first offer and not negotiate, while men may push pack a little more.
    Once you strart off on a lower pay it’s a lot harder to catch up.

    Certainly would be interesting to look into it

    [DPF: I think that may be a factor, and would be interesting to have research in that area]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Kiwi Poll Guy (22 comments) says:

    It’s a shame that neither the Stuff article, nor the Minister’s press release had a link to the study. 10 minutes browsing the MWA website also failed to find it.

    From what I gather from the press releases, the findings are that one year after graduating women with freshly minted Commerce degrees earn 20% less than men with freshly minted Commerce degrees. The study doesn’t seem to control for previous education (a Commerce degree might be a second degree), doesn’t control for different jobs, doesn’t control for workforce participation (recent women graduates are more likely to be on maternity leave than recent male graduates are to be on paternity leave), and doesn’t appear to control for hours worked (women working “full time” don’t necessarily work the same hours as men working “full time.”)

    I think it would be sensible to reserve judgment until the report is available wouldn’t it?

    [DPF: I looked for the report also and failed to find it]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    “That would also be worthwhile research – far better to track a large group of students, than merely to just compare the average wages over all occupations.”

    How can you possibly say or believe this. $2m of taxpayers’ money to research and then address what exactly?

    [DPF: Well it depends on the research, but understanding a problem is usually necessary to think reaching any conclusions about whether or not desirable changes can be made.]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    You would expect a female and male commerce graduate who both enter the same profession to be attracting the same pay rates – at least in the initial years.

    Even that’s a push. Who negotiated their pay on their first job out of uni? Not me, but I have friends who did (but it helps to have more than one job offer). A difference between the aspirations and interests of men and women could easily be seen even at this early point in their career. Not to mention that an employer would be stupid not to factor in that women are more likely to leave a job or take long periods off to have kids.

    The whole gender pay gap issue is rubbish. And a perfect issue for politicians to rally around as it will never be solved because it isn’t really a problem. How to solve the gender pay gap in three easy steps:

    1. If you don’t think you’re being paid enough, ask for more money or look for a better paid job.
    2. If you don’t think you’re being paid enough but don’t want to do step 1., then you are being paid the correct amount.
    3. Repeat.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. slightlyrighty (2,448 comments) says:

    So what is the solution?

    You would think that a man and a woman in the same role with the same experience would be getting the same pay. Gender should not be the issue but yet there remains a statistical disparity.

    How do we redress this? Can we?

    I say there is no way to redress this. What do those pushing for pay equity actually want? Do they want women to be paid more for the same work becauise they are women? Wouldn’t that make an employer more likely to hire a bloke?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    You would think that a man and a woman in the same role with the same experience would be getting the same pay.

    Why? If two men, both aged 27, applied for a job with your company and had the same experience and qualifications and in the interview one of them said “There’s a 50% chance that at some point in the next 5 years I’ll need one or more year-long periods off work and you’ll need to keep my job open but of course I also reserve the right to resign at the end of the periods.”

    Which man would you employ? Well you wouldn’t employ the (wo)man unless they would work for less in order to compensate for the possible downtime.

    Maternity leave adds a potential additional cost to hiring a woman and so it’s not unreasonable that some employers will try to compensate by offering them lower pay in the first place.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    Let’s just assume, for one second, that this gap does not come down to men being more aggressive negotiators, or more ambitious, or less likely to require parental leave, or more career-oriented, and that there really is just good-old-fashioned sexism out there from employers. With anti-discrimination laws already in place, what more could the government do to fix the problem?

    The only real solution I can think of is compulsory disclosure of salary, as they do in Norway. It would certainly help create a more open market for decent pay packets. But I think most New Zealanders prefer their privacy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. somewhatthoughtful (436 comments) says:

    c’mon redbaiter! can’t wait for his response to this :D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Pete George (21,799 comments) says:

    Another factor could be that men on average put more priority on money – going for and choosing jobs that pay better, whereas women may tend more use a wider criteria like job satisfaction and balance.

    The relentless quest for more money doesn’t drive everyone. Maybe it drives women less than men.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Jeff83 (765 comments) says:

    c’mon redbaiter! can’t wait for his response to this

    I understand he is indisposed currently consuming his elix for life of the tears a communist he has locked up in his cellar.

    Have a feeling esczett point most probably has hit this on the head, with many guys generally less willing to be taken for a ride. Pure guess though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Owen McShane (1,226 comments) says:

    I notice the report refers to graduates only.
    Could this be because the last time I looked young unskilled males are paid less than young unskilled females.
    Next time you go into your bank look for the number of men behind the counter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. BlairM (2,266 comments) says:

    Owen McShane makes a very good point. As I found out last year, it is almost impossible for a male to get any sort of clerical job. It’s sexism in action – men are assumed to be more ambitious and therefore unlikely to stay in the job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. dime (8,746 comments) says:

    how many millions are they spending on helping boys catch up to girls at school and uni?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    With anti-discrimination laws already in place, what more could the government do to fix the problem?

    If it was a maternity leave issue – pay the leave out of taxpayers money, taking the heat off the company ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    I’m sure the Families Commission will chip in soon to assert some ongoing relevance – expect all these redundant and indeed destructive organisations to be quite vocal about what they are doing “to fix the problem of…” as the public service goes through some restructuring.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    “If it was a maternity leave issue – pay the leave out of taxpayers money, taking the heat off the company ”

    That already happens. Holding the position open of course is a cost to the company.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    As I found out last year, it is almost impossible for a male to get any sort of clerical job. It’s sexism in action

    That probably goes way back to when the typewriter first came out and the YWCA started classes to teach young women how to use it. Thereafter the job became mostly done by females. There’s that old joke of women in the 60s saying, “we will not be dictated to!” and all rushing out and getting jobs as stenographers. When I was in high school it was only girls who took typing class. The computer (the CBM PET when I first started high school) was mostly used for computing and not word processing.

    But yeh, you’re right. It does seem sexist, and you can waste a lot of time going to interviews because employers aren’t allowed to mention in their ads they they want a woman for the job. I think that’s bollocks. If you want a certain sex working for you, you should be able to say so. It would save everyone a lot of time dancing around the sexual discrimination thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    That already happens. Holding the position open of course is a cost to the company.

    Well, i’m an iiignoramous.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    @ stephen http://www.ird.govt.nz/yoursituation-ind/parents/parents-paid-parental-leave.html

    if you are interested. Another piece of Labour social engineering a real government would reverse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. mpledger (428 comments) says:

    Another reason I have heard for (professional) men earning more is that they switch jobs more often with the objective of getting a higher salary – something like a two year churn. The churn for women is a lot longer.

    Which is kind of ironic because it’s argued that men’s loyalty to the company (because they do not take leave for child care) is the reason for their increased salary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    I reckon this is just agitprop to “churn” more money from the taxpayer into the Department of womens affairs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    @ mpledger that seems unlikely to me. Too much job hopping starts to make you less employable not more for precisely that reason. But in a professional career context you absolutely should change jobs at the 3-5 year mark if maximising your income is your goal.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    if you are interested. Another piece of Labour social engineering a real government would reverse.

    Thank you KiwiGreg, i’d just gotten to the DOL site saying pretty much the same. I’m young so we’ll say that’s why I didn’t know. I hazard that reversing that measure would be *incredibly* unpopular, both with businesses (having to find money to pay good female employees maternity leave with, whether paying maternity leave was mandated or not) and with people generally – ‘poor mothers!’ etc.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    I reckon this is just agitprop to “churn” more money from the taxpayer into the Department of womens affairs.

    If you were going to have a MOWA, wouldn’t this be exactly the sort of work you’d expect them to do?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    this is a no brainer.
    Go into any bank outlet and one glance will tell you that its full of women. And they get paid stuff all. At the local bank I go to, there are 7 woman, no males. Of the 7, 5 have working hubbys or partners, – these women are there working rather than sitting at home. 3 of them are actually part timers. They are actually just happy to have a job. At any pay rate.

    School teachers – almost exclusively female in primary schools – start work on about $30k. After 5 years theyll be lucky to be on $50k. Theres not a salesman in the country being paid less than $60k + car.

    The so called problem is not that women get paid less, it the jobs that women go for – (or are sort of) self selected for – retail banking, teaching, nursing, are almost exclusively female. Physio. media studies, art and drama – big majority are female.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    “The so called problem is not that women get paid less, it the jobs that women go for – (or are sort of) self selected for – retail banking, teaching, nursing, are almost exclusively female. Physio. media studies, art and drama – big majority are female.”

    Doesn’t seem to matter:

    “While the income gap varies between different fields of study, no matter what area of study is pursued an income gap has emerged between men and women … and it is quite a significant gap,”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    Jezzzuuuzzzz Christ on a bike. How many times must we bear this worthless crap??

    There is no gender discrimination, unless its pro- women anti- male. Women earn less because of social demographics, not because of sexual discrimination.

    Patsy Wong is useless and should have been fired year ago. And its nothing to do with her being a women, or even Chinese. She’s just completely clueless. End of story.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. jrep (1 comment) says:

    > I’m generally reluctant to conclude discrimination, and look for other factors, because discrimination is just so plain stupid.

    A point you seem to overlook is that differences of the scale we’re talking about here can be the result of unconscious discrimination. See, for example, Eric Ries (http://bit.ly/bJ7MbR), who reports that upon having his recruiter elide any gender references “much to my surprise (and embarrassment), the kinds of people I started phone-screening changed immediately.”

    You might also be interested to read that gender does *not* significantly determine aptitude for technical work (Terri Oda, http://bit.ly/d9YuqA)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. PaulL (5,774 comments) says:

    Another potential – we are assuming all graduates are straight from school. There are a lot of people getting degrees later in life. Is it possible that some of the male graduates previously had a management job, then got a management degree, and went back into that job. Which probably paid a lot better than the kind of job someone straight from school gets.

    Further, if we accept that at senior levels in existing organisations there are more men than women (for a bunch of reasons I won’t go into, but I think empirically true), then logically there would be more men in this situation than women. Lay an average across it, and hey presto, men paid more than women.

    As a statistician, you should be looking for the median here. My guess is that a handful of highly paid men at the top are dragging that average up, a median doesn’t have that problem.

    Women’s Affairs are a master of using dodgy statistics to get air time and justify their existence. Pansy Wong would do us all a service if she asked her department to actually break it down into something actionable:
    – what is the detail behind the study, same as global warming you should share your methodology and data
    – is it really a problem or just an interesting fact? It is a problem if two identical (except gender) people are paid differently for the same job. It is an interesting fact if women choose lower paying jobs (not identical), or if some men get a degree after they’re already well paid
    – what would we like to do about it – what is the realistic action that the government will take to change any real problems that exist?

    Forcing that level of discipline would suddenly tell us whether Women’s Affairs are a government body, or a government funded lobby group.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    Well said, Paul.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Danyl Mclauchlan (1,049 comments) says:

    The only real solution I can think of is compulsory disclosure of salary, as they do in Norway. It would certainly help create a more open market for decent pay packets. But I think most New Zealanders prefer their privacy.

    There is an alternative – a government body that audits large employers and looks for gender discrimination and publicises results (ie this company has a 15% gender pay gap between comparable jobs).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    PANSY Wong should have been fired years ago. Except that to do so would probably be portrayed as an act of discrimination not only against women but also against Chinese, which even if it were so, would still actually be OK because these are the reasons National took her on in the first place, and in doing so they discriminated against non-Asian males. But that’s OK of course. What a fuck up this Marxist racist sexist PC crap really is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Pete George (21,799 comments) says:

    Is it worth spending humongous time and cost to analyse this? Can’t the job market be left to find it’s own levels? I think there is reasonably equal opportunity to get training and education, why should it need to go further than that?

    There is all sorts of discrimination – sex, age, race, beauty, weight, religion, politics, strength, intelligence, qualifications, and I’m sure there are more. It’s ok to have general guidelines that exclude blatant discrimination but you are dealing with people on both sides of the equation.

    Guide, educate, encourage, urge maybe. But I don’t see how you can never enforce no discrimination.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. PaulL (5,774 comments) says:

    stephen: whatever the field of study, yes. That isn’t the same as asserting that the jobs within that field that men and women pursue are the same. Something like 30% of university graduates these days have a commerce degree. My last EA had a commerce degree (actually quite a good marketing degree). I don’t think she was paid the same as someone doing management type work. Again, without seeing the study there is little that we can conclude other than that there may be a problem, or there may be poorly executed statistical foolishness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. mavxp (490 comments) says:

    In my experience with female colleagues with similar work experience and education (post graduate engineering, same specialism), the pay rates for starting with a new company were identical. The company (and this is typical for the industry) had an annual performance review system that pay was officially not linked to, but of course it was. Being promoted a grade in the company based on performance opened access to a new “pay band”, but your pay rate was still at the discretion of your boss. Your ability to convince your reviewer (usually your line manager) that your performance was now at a higher level was crucial to being promoted. This is the weak link in the chain if a boss were sexist or ageist or whatever, that is where it would show. Aside from overt sexism there is also much down to your ability to promote confidence in your abilities to your reviewer. Low self esteem, humility or lower self confidence would result in slower progression and lower pay regardless of sex. More agressive / confident dimenour will progressively result in higher pay. Aspects like deeper voice and the way men carry themselves physically may be subtle ways of projecting confidence to bosses that women may be sub-conscously discriminated against. It’s no secret Maggie Thatcher and Helen Clark both faked deeper voices to be taken more seriously.

    I agree with Paul that the median is what should be used. We are looking at women progressively moving into new areas of the economy (eg higher levels of engineering, management, law and medicine) and this will take time to filter through. I also agree that many low-skilled clerical work almost exclusively hire women, whilst low-skilled manual work almost exclusively hire men (eg construction labourers), and this is unlikely to change much.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. annie (533 comments) says:

    I think it’s subconscious discrimination. Having said that, it’s partly down to the way women present themselves, in my opinion.

    I worked in IT for years, and having watched the way my male colleagues behaved in interviews, and heard them talk about the way they handled performance appraisals, I adopted their approach – forget the modesty, talk yourself up. Shamelessly. Be aggressive about the fact that you are valuable and deserve higher pay, point out your achievements and spin them. Make any interviews all about how good you are (but stay credible).

    And initiate a handshake at the start of any interview before the guy you are dealing with has a chance to, make it firm and look them in the eye.

    Also – and this is where most women fall down – you have to work like a man – no chatty phone calls, no gossip with the girls, no slacking off, no shopping breaks, work an extra hour at the end of each day, don’t get coffee and NEVER clean up after an office shout, even if someone drops cake on the floor at your feet and expects you to pick it up. Make sure your achievements are obvious, and don’t let anyone take credit for your work and live to tell the tale.

    Demand promotion, and be prepared to jump if you don’t get it. Most significant salary advances come with regular job changes.

    Finally, if you are working part time with children, you have to work extra hours at home, and be available for urgent work.

    And guess what – my salary shot up, and I stayed on salary that was at the high end compared to my male colleagues until I left IT for something more interesting.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. stephen (4,063 comments) says:

    Yes PaulL it’s a bit generalised. As others have said, the report itself would be awfully nice to have.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. PaulL (5,774 comments) says:

    I have no objection to making salary public knowledge. I can see a handful of benefits:
    – if taxable income is well known, then people will quickly dob in those who seem to be living beyond their means (i.e. tax cheats)
    – it would help in baselining your own salary. If the guy next to me is paid more, and I think I do more work, it gives me a better bargaining position. Secret salaries make it easier for back room deals.

    I’d much rather this than creation of some government audit office to waste their time doing something we’d all happily do for free. I’m not entirely convinced that there should be a right to privacy, v’s that being one of the newer “rights” that some like to proclaim but that I don’t put in the same category as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. JiveKitty (869 comments) says:

    I have heard managers complain of the maternity leave factor in the past. One I talked to had two female staff take leave within about three months of each other. They took the maximum amount of time off and then announced they wouldn’t be returning. Similar occurences had happened in the past. I don’t know the statistics for this kind of thing, but if they’re significant then I can’t imagine it’s an incentive to employ women, or if employing women to employ them on the same wage.

    If maternity leave is a significant factor, then perhaps we need to change incentives and stop offering it. No, we can’t do that? Well then.

    Also, yes, I too would be interested in the methodology of this study and the median figures. Actually, I’d be interested in seeing the study. Has anybody found it yet?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. grumpyoldhori (2,410 comments) says:

    One problem with too many women is that they want to be friends with the boss/manager so rocking the boat is just not done by a lot.
    Unlike a lot of blokes who would drown every bugger in the boat by capsizing it to make their point.
    Annie, not cleaning up after males, wait until you have a fourteen year old whose means of communication is by grunts as he vacuums the fridge clear :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. TripeWryter (715 comments) says:

    Discrimination in the workplace?: try being a middle-aged, educated, white male …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Nigel Kearney (747 comments) says:

    I agree with PaulL – ‘mature’ students will heavily skew this and there is no indication that the study is limited to young people or that it is their first degree. If I earned six figures the year after completing a law degree – except that it wasn’t my first degree and I was continuing in the same (non-law) job I had held for years before finishing the degree. Conversely my wife earned close to zero the year after completing a degree as she was caring for our first child. If they are regarding a 1% difference as significant then of course they will find that without there needing to be any discrimination.

    Also, I’m no expert on the latest and greatest views on how discrimination is supposed to work, but I thought the explanation for males beating females in purely intellectual activities such as chess, bridge and scrabble (at any age) was that societal discrimination is so endemic while growing up that females can’t avoid performing worse on average. If that’s true then you’d expect women to earn less whether the employer discriminates or not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. PaulL (5,774 comments) says:

    Ah, good point Nigel. I didn’t consider the possibility that some women completing a degree have a child in the following year – nothing stopping them having sex whilst at university. If even 5% of women have a child the year after completing university, then average wage for women will be very significantly impacted – easily accounting for a 1-2% difference.

    Be nice if Women’s Affairs published that paper and methodology.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. jaba (2,068 comments) says:

    every-time I hear the line “a woman’s work is never done” I always think “that’s probably why you are paid less”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.