About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

October 19, 2006 12:02pm by David Farrar

Why men are paid more?

An interesting article in the Herald-Sun on why men are paid more than women.

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment169

Uncategorized
Uncategorized

Related Stories

No surprise – a business suicide
The pay gender gap
A horrendous own goal

Comments (169)

Login to comment or vote

Mike Readman

Screw that! It must be discrimination!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 19, 2006 5:39pm
Mike Readman

Screw that! It must be discrimination!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 19, 2006 5:49pm
Sean

Pretty obvious really. I don’t know why it keeps popping up in the news here from time to time.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 19, 2006 8:11pm
Mill

The reason it keeps popping up is that, until the passage of equal pay legislation in the 1960s and 1970s, employers could legally pay women less than men for exactly the same job. With the removal of legal discrimination, it was expected that the gender pay gap would disappear over time, especially as women’s educational qualifications have increased markedly over the past few decades. At least, that’s what economic theory predicted. Hence, it has been monitored in many countries and also by the OECD.

Yet even on an hourly basis, women’s pay is still only about 85% of men’s in NZ. The gap is much smaller among younger women and men with tertiary qualifications who work full-time, but it’s still there. Since ageing populations will need as much labour as they can get, there is good reason to keep trying to find the reason why women tend to get paid less than men, to make it worth their while to stay in work, even when they have children. Unless the guys want to shoulder all the burden of supporting the oldies themselves, or we drastically increase immigration…

For a more balanced view than Arndt’s, see this:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/the-boom-economys-biggest-losers/2006/10/10/1160246129160.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 19, 2006 11:32pm
mavxp

That last link (smh) is a bit stupid.
The obvious reason why women who are in academic professions (the example in that article) are occupying the lower levels is descrimination based on age and experience not gender.

When the current Profs were starting out as lecturers their colleagues were probably mostly men. It is just a matter of waiting for the current generation of Profs to retire (probably the next 10 years or so), and you will begin to see the tide turn in that profession toward either balance or women dominating (if indeed they dominate the lecturer and senior lecturer roles currently in that field).

It is also important to note that Professorships go to those who put in the extra time to publish research articles and become renowned in their field of expertise. For women who choose work/life balance they probably will not be publishing as much as male colleagues, and hence will not be seen as the best for the Professorship role. This is discrimination based on proven track record -experience/ expertise and not gender. This latter reason is mentioned in the first article which is a more reasoned viewpoint (IMHO).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2006 8:41am
Owen McShane

Research on this topic in the US confirmed what should be obvious.
The major determinant of earnings per week is the time spent in the workforce.
In other words if I am fifty and have been in the workforce for 35 years I shall earn more than someone with the same qualifications who has been working for six months.
Women began to participate fully in the workforce only recently in historical terms. Hence the average working woman has much fewer years experience in the workforce than the average working man.
However, this gap is rapidly closing and is the major driver of the reduction in wage inequality. Scarcity is important too. The same research showed that a black woman with the same qualifications and the same work experience was paid on average more than her white male equivalent.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2006 9:49am
phillip john

One of the main reason for the gap is that women tend to work in lower paid occupations, (as the article infers). i.e. 25% of women work in the secondary labour market (wholesale, retail, accommodation, cafes and restaurants). Where as this figure is only 20% for men. Also 30% of women work part time jobs (usually lower paid) where as this is only 10% for men. So like the article says it’s mainly about lifestyle choice. Also, a deregulated labour market tends to produce greater labour market segmentation – i.e. low paid jobs become lower paid relative to high paid jobs. This is because higher paid jobs tend to be more insulated from the market than lower paid jobs – i.e. and internal labour market operates where most positions are filled internally (There are also many other reasons). So without unions this effect is intensified. This is why countries with high union density rates generally have a lower gender pay gap.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2006 10:50am
Trouble

Yeah, and the reason why it’s mainly women that give up their financial independence and future earning power in favour of feeding, supervising and cleaning up after small children, is because that’s a special kind of fun that only women can appreciate. Nothing to do with sexist expectations that women take on most of that work, or that their income was lower than their partner’s to begin with, oh no. Lifestyle choice is what it is.

Somehow men manage to get their children raised without having to worry about work/life balance. Women should learn from that if they want to get ahead.

/sarcasm
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2006 1:25pm
phillip john

Trouble:

I agree, socially consructed normative ideas about gender role effect these lifestyle choices (the point being that they effectively limit choice), and it is an important point, which I should have made. Thanks for pointing it out.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 20, 2006 2:33pm
Porcupine

The article in question is a very interesting example of what in statistics is known as “Simpson’s Paradox” – where you collapse your data (income) over non-independent categories (hours worked, type of job, skill level etc) and come up with absolutely spurious conclusions.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 2:05pm
Kimble

Porcupine’s comment is what is known in the blogging world as ‘declaring something as fact without bothering to explain why’.

WHY is the conclusion spurious, Porcy?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 2:56pm
observer

“Why is the conclusion spurious, Porcy?”

Because the gender gap cited by Arndt doesn’t take into account differences in hours worked, type of job, skill level, etc.

For further information on Simpson’s Paradox, see this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson's_paradox

and, a real example from NZ, this:

http://www.stats.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/5DFEE5C8-A969-4684-B95F-FA2AFEDA649A/0/Simpdox.pdf
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 3:35pm
Porcupine

Thanks observer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 7:15pm
observer

Actually, Porcupine, I don’t think Simpson’s Paradox does apply to the gender wage gap, unless you can demonstrate that at the level of individual occupations, women are paid more than men. That is what the paradox refers to: a result at the most aggregated level being the opposite of that observed at a disaggregated level.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 7:44pm
Porcupine

Well according to the article on face value that is what it is saying although I admit there is no real data to back it up. Probably for many cases it is true though – for example I wouldnt be surprised if on an hourly rate basis women beat men because they are generally very responsible workers who focus well on the job at hand, often in more skilled jobs than men.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 8:01pm
observer

“I wouldnt be surprised if on an hourly rate basis women beat men because they are generally very responsible workers who focus well on the job at hand, often in more skilled jobs than men.”

That’s pure speculation based on a stereotype.

This is the most thorough NZ study I can find online (there’s another one by the NZIER but it’s not free).

http://www.stats.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/943BAFFC-5DFF-4B72-B6AE-1B041A82FDA8/0/explgap.pdf

The conclusion:

Around half of the earnings of both women and men in full-time employment can be explained by
the variables selected for exploration. When the characteristics of 12 of the sub-groups identified are applied in a process of standardisation, the identification of these variables improves the average weekly earnings of women (relative to men) from 0.79 to 0.85, indicating that at least some of the earnings gap can be attributed to structural differences within the full-time workforce. The majority of this improvement occurred when standardised for hours worked. What may be of more interest here is not further quantification of the difference in hours worked between the sexes but rather
attempts to explore the reasons why women work less hours than men in all occupations. The
reasons are likely to be varied and may reflect women’s greater levels of responsibility for childcare,
care of adults, and unpaid work in general, and differing societal roles and expectations. Information from the upcoming 1998/99 Time Use Survey as well as the 1998 Childcare Survey may shed more light on the matter. Alternatively, the information could be used to answer the equally valid question
– “why do men work more hours than women?”.
Overall, the results of this work indicate that personal characteristics such as hours worked, level of highest qualification and age are of some importance in determining earnings while household and family characteristics are not. Consistent with other research in this area, the role of occupation appears not be a main factor. The findings indicate that there are indeed some structural factors associated with the earnings gap (particularly hours worked).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 8:20pm
Porcupine

Very interesting thanks. Hey you can learn heaps on these blogs.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 23, 2006 9:42pm
myfreepaysite

Very good site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
February 23, 2007 2:50pm
autoregistrator

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 22, 2007 7:11am
autoregistrator

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
April 22, 2007 7:12am
skinny porn adult naked nude

Very good site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 4:08am
skinny porn adult naked nude

Very good site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 4:08am
shaved porn adult naked nude

Good site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 5:11am
shaved porn adult naked nude

Good site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 5:12am
exhibitionism porn free movies online

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 9:31am
exhibitionism porn free movies online

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 9:32am
rough porn free movies online

Good site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 11:13am
gay porn free movies online

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 11:07pm
gay porn free movies online

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 20, 2007 11:08pm
bikini sex free movies online

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2007 8:22am
boobs playboy free movies online

Very good site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2007 8:30pm
boobs playboy free movies online

Very good site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 23, 2007 8:31pm
bukkake porn adult naked girls

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2007 5:37am
teens porn adult naked girls

Good site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2007 12:19pm
teens porn adult naked girls

Good site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2007 12:19pm
granny porn big tits naked nude

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 24, 2007 5:56pm
black pussy free vagina online

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 25, 2007 7:10am
naked mature free movies online

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 25, 2007 10:55pm
asian cumfree movies online

Cool site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 26, 2007 1:07pm
blow up doll free movies online

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 26, 2007 6:27pm
blow up doll free movies online

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 26, 2007 6:27pm
rough blow job free movies online

Nice site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 26, 2007 8:08pm
porn star blow job free movies online

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 26, 2007 9:16pm
porn star blow job free movies online

Good site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 26, 2007 9:17pm
gay teen free movies online

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 27, 2007 12:18am
interracial dating free movies online

Nice site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 27, 2007 7:04am
interracial dating free movies online

Nice site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 27, 2007 7:04am
redhead interracial free movies online

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 27, 2007 9:40pm
interracial cock free movies online

Cool site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 27, 2007 11:11pm
nylon tubecom free movies online

Nice site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 28, 2007 2:15am
free movie nylon wet xxx free movies online

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 28, 2007 4:10am
free movie nylon wet xxx free movies online

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 28, 2007 4:11am
nylon bag free movies online

Good site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 28, 2007 5:43am
Zyloprim 180 pills x 300 mg

Very good site. Thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 28, 2007 7:18pm
Ambien 30 pills x 5 mg

Nice site. Thank you!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 29, 2007 11:11am
Cardura 30 pills x 4 mg

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 29, 2007 9:40pm
soft core teen adult naked nude

Cool site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 30, 2007 12:45pm
quality soft core adult naked nude

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 30, 2007 4:05pm
quality soft core adult naked nude

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 30, 2007 4:05pm
soft core outdoor adult naked nude

Very good site. Thanks!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 12:05am
soft core outdoor adult naked nude

Very good site. Thanks!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 12:06am
transsexual porn star adult naked nude

Nice site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 3:29am
transsexual porn star adult naked nude

Nice site. Thank you:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 3:30am
transsexual fucked adult naked nude

Nice site. Thank you!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 7:24am
transsexual orgy adult naked nude

Nice site. Thanks:-)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
May 31, 2007 9:19am
gsbhfi qnstgdolf

oqch nftbjovmz qrdtozxi ybeipzh zpjlrug pmodyrah lhaktep
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:47am
xkvi fkbx

ekhypscz okyhz rstovfklw semuxdag sdfgm cjadr egzqhmndj http://www.thywjeru.xauolwfm.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:49am
xkvi fkbx

ekhypscz okyhz rstovfklw semuxdag sdfgm cjadr egzqhmndj http://www.thywjeru.xauolwfm.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:51am
xkvi fkbx

ekhypscz okyhz rstovfklw semuxdag sdfgm cjadr egzqhmndj http://www.thywjeru.xauolwfm.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:52am
cxip lmzrqo

hnqzecj jtyl stqadprl vrogcj ckorz txdijzpay dgbqrujm uvonlyza bepwt
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:52am
cxip lmzrqo

hnqzecj jtyl stqadprl vrogcj ckorz txdijzpay dgbqrujm uvonlyza bepwt
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:54am
cxip lmzrqo

hnqzecj jtyl stqadprl vrogcj ckorz txdijzpay dgbqrujm uvonlyza bepwt
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:55am
ziecmfn njvzbcule

fvwxcnetj ohkawn cjdozw zwoft fwcoeysp gnqjadweb qvza [URL]http://www.vhbqzxjdi.znjilq.com[/URL] ktyemv fzvxyg
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 8, 2007 10:57am
food gift basket

Cool site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 23, 2007 6:12am
t4ramadol

Good site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 10, 2007 1:30am
t4ramadol

Good site. Thank you.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 10, 2007 1:30am

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« A lot of angry people

Essay on 2005 election campaign »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Top Stories

General Debate 19 April 2024
General Debate 20 April 2024
Two terrible attacks in Australia
Singapore takes defence very seriously
Coalition Operating Agreement
Are those with access cards the problem?
No excuse for fleeing
General Debate 18 April 2024
This could explain the brickbat
We still have an inflation problem

Recent Posts

The Waitangi Tribunal is not a judicial body 20 April 2024
General Debate 20 April 2024 20 April 2024
Coalition Operating Agreement 20 April 2024
Are those with access cards the problem? 19 April 2024
Singapore takes defence very seriously 19 April 2024
General Debate 19 April 2024 19 April 2024
Two terrible attacks in Australia 19 April 2024
No excuse for fleeing 18 April 2024
This could explain the brickbat 18 April 2024
General Debate 18 April 2024 18 April 2024
We still have an inflation problem 18 April 2024
UK Labour Deputy Leader in trouble 17 April 2024

Never miss a post

Email Address

Recent Comments

Coalition Operating Agreement
Steve Otto(North Shore)
The Waitangi Tribunal is not a judicial body
Steve Otto(North Shore)
General Debate 20 April 2024
mikenmildagain
The Waitangi Tribunal is not a judicial body
CJames
The Waitangi Tribunal is not a judicial body
mikenmildagain
General Debate 20 April 2024
Ghost
Coalition Operating Agreement
mikenmildagain
General Debate 20 April 2024
imalwaysright
General Debate 20 April 2024
Pope Punctilious II
General Debate 20 April 2024
kevn
General Debate 20 April 2024
mikenmildagain
General Debate 20 April 2024
Maggie Pie
General Debate 20 April 2024
mikenmildagain
General Debate 20 April 2024
mikenmildagain
General Debate 20 April 2024
Che Guava

Links

Word of the day
Hompaddock
Populist Extremism and Culture Wars on the rise in NZ? We’ve been here before, but why it’s different this time
The Daily Blog
A crisis of ambition
Point of Order
Silence is Golden
No Minister
Response from Devin Pope, on religious attendance
Utopia
Open mike 20/04/2024
The Standard
A who's who of New Zealand's dodgiest companies
No Right Turn
"Under a better Resource Management system [sic], there would be no need for fast-track approval processes."
Not PC
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
RACIST ADVERTISING
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Is the state coming for churches?
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
Super Rugby Predictions for Week 9
Stats Chat
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d