Reminder: Pay Equity Faxathon

10 comments on “Reminder: Pay Equity Faxathon ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Julie 1

   6 March 2009 at 1:54 pm

   Aww, thanks Tane, that’s fab 🙂
2. Alex 2

   6 March 2009 at 3:46 pm

   Equal pay for equal work. Gender has nothing to do with it.
3. Monty 3

   6 March 2009 at 4:53 pm

   Faxes – so 1980’s.

   What a pointless exercise – probably in much the same way as the enquiries into pay equity for women was in the first place – surely the Ministry of Wimmims Affairs has many such reports all saying much the same thing accumulated over 9 years of labour.

   I suggest those reports are dragged out and if indeed there is pay inequity (I doubt there actually is – but different roles tend to attract either males or females in greater numbers so upon what criteria is the “pay inequity actually judged upon)

   While such reports were proudly presented under a Labour Government, I agree with Tony Ryall that there is no point in endlessly re-inventing the wheel which is all these “reports would have done.
   • Matthew Pilott 3.1

     6 March 2009 at 5:01 pm

     I clearly get to mock you for bad spelling here. “Wimmims” affairs?

     If you’re going down the redneck path, learn to spell the requisite redneckisms, Monty.

     Anyway, you’re fairly confident of what you’ve got to say. Give me a link to the report that covers the gender pat gap in the Public Service…what’s that? You haven’t got one and you’re just making things up to suit your own bigoted worldview? Oh. Maybe you should learn to act like an adult, Monty.
4. Madeleine 4

   6 March 2009 at 10:38 pm

   Basic human rights are covered by the Bill of Rights and various international treaties. Discrimination law, employment law and a raft of other things all ensure that women get paid the same amount as men.

   What’s not worth paying for is more duplication of things already covered by and enforceable at law.
5. Jum 5

   7 March 2009 at 11:16 am

   Madeleine
   So why aren’t the women’ pay inequities resolved by ‘the Bill of Rights, various international treaties, discrimination law, employment law and a raft of other things’ then? They’ve been around long enough.

   But, women are still lower paid than the men. Why? I’ll tell you why. Because women like Madeleine are happy to be seen as not worth what men are worth.
   That gives those who don’t see women as equal human beings the opportunity to exploit that stupidity.

   I am insulted that Ryall ever got into government never mind his actions against women, but I’m even more insulted by Madeleine who puts her individual need to be dominated (in the workplace) over the needs of other women by wanting to be paid less.

   Legislation won’t necessarily stop the inhuman treatment of women, but a government of the people for the people would certainly influence the thinking of business/government agencies by investigating why WINZ women are paid 9.5% less for example. But then NAct has never been a government of the people for the people.

   And then the M of Women’s Affairs Minister Pansy Wong has the nerve to tell women they’re a shining light internationally because they got the vote first. What a joke. Seddon was forced to give women the vote through a miscalculation of numbers. NZ still has the worst domestic violence record. NZ still has disgraceful zilch pay equity. And NZ still has women who blame women for everything from being raped to wanting to wear trousers or wanting equal pay for equal work. Well done Madeleine.
   • Ari 5.1

     8 March 2009 at 7:14 am

     Jum, I have to seriously disagree that it’s appropriate to attack people for being satisfied with the idea of equality by principle. It’s a great idea, and in a world where principles of law and items in the Bill of Rights were taken very seriously, it WOULD be enough for discrimination against women to be covered there.

     (Also, I think people have vastly different thresholds for inequality. For some, a 10% pay differential is seriously not a big deal, because their income exceeds their expenditure anyway.)

     That said, we should be aggressive in saying why that idea doesn’t work in terms of practical inequalities, (such as unconscious discrimination, groupthink, devaluation, the boys’ club, etc…) because there are good reasons why equality by principle is currently not enough. I do, however, have hope that it should be a goal we can realise in the future. (although not within my lifetime)
6. Jum 6

   7 March 2009 at 12:24 pm

   Alex
   March 6, 2009 at 3:46 pm

   said “Equal pay for equal work. Gender has nothing to do with it.”

   Let’s change that to ‘should’ have nothing to do with it. But many businesses/National government ministers/agencies don’t quite see it that way.

   Believe it or not, I think these people actually believe women shouldn’t even be in the workforce, sorry PAID workforce, because that gives them independence and even Rights! Yes! Rights. And no doubt we will see that proven over the next few years as all women are targeted in one way or another over abortion, the right to work, the 90day fire at will, etc.

   I see no difference at all in the work that male and female social workers do. Size doesn’t matter. Strength doesn’t matter. For the simple reason that men and women don’t fit that mould that has been forced on them for centuries. Take a look at the arms on the pioneer women and tell me they couldn’t deal with a difficult client that National has told is now out of a house, a job, etc. In fact, it is more likely the women who will be targeted as being seen as the lesser of the two sexes and therefore they should be paid More!
7. Clint Heine 7

   7 March 2009 at 10:11 pm

   Honestly, I think it is a good event and it should be supported, as it was going by the feedback I have seen. However, why wasn’t this sort of proactive stuff happening under Labour?

   Why is it that some people hibernate until they’re in opposition?
8. Lew 8

   7 March 2009 at 10:34 pm

   Clint,

   I expect it’s because a Labour State Services Minister didn’t arbitrarily cancel enquiries into public sector pay parity between men and women.

   L

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS