Magical Budget causes imaginary closure of wage gap – Wong

25 comments on “Magical Budget causes imaginary closure of wage gap – Wong ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ianmac 1

   2 July 2010 at 10:11 am

   Pansy. You are wong!
2. tc 2

   2 July 2010 at 10:36 am

   Lying and deception seems to be working just fine for the rest of them so why should Pansy be any different……again where’s the attack lines from the folks we pay to be the opposition?
   • eye saw 2.1

     2 July 2010 at 11:35 am

     tc,this info came to light through opposition questioning pansy wrong in parliament on wed,through catherine delahunty.
     • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1

       2 July 2010 at 11:43 am

       But was it on the news?
3. Rharn 3

   2 July 2010 at 10:51 am

   That’s gota be the headline of the year.
4. Tigger 4

   2 July 2010 at 11:00 am

   Next up, the budget cures cancer and makes pigs fly.
5. Con 5

   2 July 2010 at 11:26 am

   Give her some slack: she’s 11% underpaid
6. frog 6

   2 July 2010 at 11:36 am

   This isn’t the first time Wong has done this. She similarly made up statistics on the gender pay gap back in February, as I pointed out here.
7. BLiP 7

   2 July 2010 at 11:41 am

   She got her figures from Blingish and Smith.
8. Draco T Bastard 8

   2 July 2010 at 11:45 am

   Incredibly, Wong goes on to give the credit for this closing of the gap to the Government 2010 Budget…

   It’s just a part of their faith based governance. If they say something enough it may just become true.
9. deemac 9

   2 July 2010 at 12:36 pm

   why should they stop making things up when the media never call them on it?
   • Craig Glen Eden 9.1

     2 July 2010 at 3:10 pm

     That’s it in a nut shell deemac, as long as they keep lying with no bad consequences they will continue to do it and we the people are worse off for it. The country will be shit by the time they have finished.
10. the sprout 10

    2 July 2010 at 1:12 pm

    great post
11. a human 11

    2 July 2010 at 3:18 pm

    At the risk of sounding like a pedant…
    In every job i have ever had, the woman working beside me got the same money.

    The issue is job designation and promotion policies, both very important and currently unfair practises, neither of which have anything to do with some ficticious wage gap.

    Quite seriously, i have been hearing this crap for thirty years and am completely sick of it.
    Find me a job where two equally qualified people of different gender are doing the same job for different money and i will gladly eat my hat.
    • Rosy 11.1

      2 July 2010 at 4:40 pm

      At the risk of sounding like a pedant from the other side – In every job I’ve worked at (IT industry) the guy working beside me has earned more money because he had a different job designation, but did the same work. And when I left a job (because that was the only way to get a promotion) the new guy got the same title and same money as the guy who worked beside me. And quite seriously I’m sick of hearing it doesn’t happen.
      • a human 11.1.1

        2 July 2010 at 5:07 pm

        that is what i said
        it is not a gender issue, it is one of accurate and FAIR job designation

        neither of which the people paying the money out ever want to admit or resolve
        why would they when they can watch society run round in a flap blaming sexual discrimination
        • Rosy 11.1.1.1

          2 July 2010 at 5:31 pm

          The designation to justify lower pay happened because it is a gender issue first. Your’e saying that it can be sorted by looking at the job designation, but it’s pretty easy to call a male fixing a computer a technician and a female fixing a computer a customer services representative and be blind to the fact it’s the same job if you have an inherent belief that men’s and women’s work is different. Both designations are ‘fair’. It is (was) a bias in the industry. The man is fixing the computer (boy’s job), the woman is helping a customer (girl’s job) – either way they’re both wielding the screwdriver, but only one is being screwed over.
          • a human 11.1.1.1.1

            2 July 2010 at 6:23 pm

            “wielding the screwdriver…..” lovely line, can i steal it sometime?

            There lies the rub, the skewed perception of a gender’s character or ability
            which we all know is archaic hogwash and it’s the person that matters first and foremost

            My work history has been mainly in Hospitality and has not suffered the same inequality as other industries. I wish i had an answer that would bring more employers to understand how simple it is to treat people with respect
            • Carol 11.1.1.1.1.1

              2 July 2010 at 6:38 pm

              Actually there’s more to it than how a job is designated now. Jobs that have traditionally been classified as “female” eg nursing have a legacy of being paid less than “male” jobs that require a similar level of skill and/or education & training. It’s hard to counter that legacy, because, for example, each occupation argues for cost-of-living increases so that they maintain their existing pay equivalence.

              Of course, the answer is for more women to do traditionally “masculine” jobs. But once large numbers of women get into that job, ‘society’ begins to value it less. Or often large numbers of women don’t get into a job until guys have already decided it has been devalued (often because of technological change).

              Some traditionally masculine jobs create a hostile environment for women (engineering, for instance), so that women tend not to stay long in those jobs.

              Then, when it comes to pay equality “on average”, it also has to do with promotion issues… class ceiling etc.
            • Rosy 11.1.1.1.1.2

              2 July 2010 at 7:03 pm

              Any time you like, a human 🙂 and thanks, yeah it would be good if we were all judged on ability. We live in hope!
          • QoT 11.1.1.1.2

            2 July 2010 at 9:53 pm

            Or take the Talley’s case, Rosy – women and men doing basically identical roles, but at different stages of the process – and quite coincidentally men got assigned to one stage, women to another, and men were paid more.*

            Which is not even to raise the question of, in this selfish day and de-unionised age, who really knows what “the person next to them” gets paid?

            *Of course this is probably because, as noted philosopher and committed examiner of human nature Andrew Talley said, “Some jobs are bloke’s jobs and some jobs are women’s jobs, like poledancing.”
12. tc 12

    2 July 2010 at 4:24 pm

    My point is that whilst some of the BS is exposed in QTime (when they bother to show up and answer)……it never seems to get beyond that and is seen by the majority as just parliamentary games rather than the more serious matters it actually is.

    Whatever happened to Blindtrustgate ? Sideshow was caught well and truly lying his currency dealing arse off.
    • a human 12.1

      2 July 2010 at 5:14 pm

      take yesterday’s ‘Bill and Mary’ skit.
      A waste of Parliamentary time, no-one was working on anything but their next interjection,
      the clock just ticked along as the country was getting worse off with each passing second.

      A bloody disgrace and these idiots want a 10% raise.
13. Helen Kelly 13

    5 July 2010 at 11:14 am

    It is likely the budget added to the real wealth gap between men and women. Top wage earners got the biggest tax cut and men are over represented in that group – the gap will grow – as will the gap between our richest and our poorest.

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 1 July 2010 at 10:08 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS