The gap is based on the difference in gross hourly earnings between men and women, and ranges from just 4.9 per cent in Italy to 30 per cent in Estonia. [Source.]The average gap across countries is 18 percent. But what is this number based on? On the "difference in gross hourly earnings between men and women", as it says. I am just not sure what that means. How is it calculated?
Is it the difference in hourly wage per person, or is it a comparison of what all women and men earn in Europe per hour? If it is per person, then it sounds really bad. If it is not per person, then it could readily be explained by more men than women earning a salary. I don't know if that would be true, but it seems a fair guess. Either way, the number should be per person earning a salary, in order to make the comparison valid.
But, even if the comparison is per person, then it would also have to be corrected for what kind of jobs European men and women have. It may well be that more men have higher paying jobs, as in more men are physicians, and more women are nurses, or some such distribution. If that's the case, that more women for some reason or other are in the kind of jobs that just generally pay less per hour, then the gap is not unfair. On the other hand, if the comparison is made across all nurses, and it turns out that male nurses earn more than female nurses per hour, then something is indeed very, very wrong, and something ought to be done right away.
Until I know how the gap is calculated (I have looked and cannot find that description - do let me know if you find any documentation on this), I don't feel so sure that taking measures to reduce the gap is the right thing to do.
Gender pay gap across Europe condemned
Pledge to cut EU gender pay gap after 15 years without progress
Danske mænd tjener 18 procent mere end kvinder
EU to propose hiking women's pay
UK women get 21% less than men
Et cetera.
Oh, and a related post from last year about the meaning of averages.
I'm pretty sure it's average earnings per hour worked. So most of the difference is due to the difference type of job, compounded by the fact that women tend to be at lower grades. Don't quote me on that tho!
ReplyDeleteTom Rees said "So most of the difference [in pay between men and women in Europe] is due to the difference type of job, compounded by the fact that women tend to be at lower grades."
ReplyDeleteQuoted!
And the rest of the difference? That there is (illegal) discrimination?
I have gotten the impression that, in the US at least, there is a gap even when using the most appropriate comparison, i.e. comparing similar jobs. But I guess I've never looked that carefully at how the data was obtained.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course, it is still troubling even if it is the average per hour worked across all jobs. Why are women working the lower-paying positions? A small gap might be explicable by the comparatively larger number of women who suspend their careers in order to raise children as opposed to men who do so (an imbalance that I suspect will always be with us, though that's a much longer subject). But a 30% gap? Even if the pay is "fair" for the job done, that's still deeply troubling. It suggests women are being excluded from the better positions.
I have gotten the impression that, in the US at least, there is a gap even when using the most appropriate comparison, i.e. comparing similar jobs. But I guess I've never looked that carefully at how the data was obtained.
ReplyDeleteI had previously understood, though never verified, that the 24% gap in the US is a comparison between net earnings by men and women, which doesn't even average over hours worked, but, like you say, there is a (much smaller) gap when making the appropriate comparison.
And of course, it is still troubling even if it is the average per hour worked across all jobs. Why are women working the lower-paying positions? A small gap might be explicable by the comparatively larger number of women who suspend their careers in order to raise children as opposed to men who do so (an imbalance that I suspect will always be with us, though that's a much longer subject). But a 30% gap? Even if the pay is "fair" for the job done, that's still deeply troubling. It suggests women are being excluded from the better positions.
It may suggest that women are being excluded from some positions, but it doesn't imply it. It may be that they don't want those jobs, for personal or cultural reasons. It could be there is a huge mining industry, for example, that attracts men, but no women.
My point is just that job discrimination and pay discrimination (less pay for women in the same job) are wrong, but that I don't think we can say that other reasons are (though I know liberals tend not to like that women are the only one's who become pregnant, that earning money is more important for men, and that there is are both biological and cultural differences between men and women that might result in women earning less [on average]). I support policies that allow women to not do the "traditional" thing, and instead go into the job market and get high-earning careers, but I also acknowledge that not all will take the offer, and that some pay gap will remain as a result.
It may be that they don't want those jobs, for personal or cultural reasons.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that even if done for cultural reasons, that doesn't mean there isn't gender discrimination taking place; it would just mean it was taking place at the cultural level rather than perpetrated by employers.
I do agree with you though that it would not be at all surprising to find that some gender disparity is a fixture of biology. On the other hand, I sincerely doubt that any widespread gender disparities we observe in 2010 have been minimized to that level. It's a fairly safe bet that discrimination continues to play a role.
I would argue that even if done for cultural reasons, that doesn't mean there isn't gender discrimination taking place; it would just mean it was taking place at the cultural level rather than perpetrated by employers.
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean you would blame someone for women wanting to disproportionally go for the lower paying jobs? Who?
I think biology is part of the reason, but that culture also plays a large role (I realize that these two factors are intertwined). And then add some direct discrimination, and you'll get 18 percent. So let's try to end direct discrimination, rather than forcing equal salaries. Equal pay in exactly the same job, in the same company, in the same city, in the same country - when the job is not one of those that pays more the better you are at it (I'm not saying anything either way; just that that could be an effect as well), yes, thank you.
One number will not do to describe the situation.
One thing to consider is the overlap in distributions of pay. Averages provide some idea as to where the center of a distribution lies, but leaping from this to the conclusion of a broad "gap" is bad science. The simple fact is that the distribution of pay for any large group of people, such as men or women, will cover a substantial range. Summarizing such a range, if it is to be done accurately, must be done with considerable care.
ReplyDelete