Fall Into the Wage Gap
The argument of women getting paid less than men as a result of discrimination is a common theme amongst social justice and equality activist these days, however, such claims do not stand under scrutiny. Suppose women made 75% for every man’s 100%. A given business could hire less women, at the lower rate, with an equal level of output as men at the higher rate, or that business could hire more women at the lower rate for a greater level of output. Why spend $300 for 3 men at a 100% output (each 33% of the collective 100%), when you could spend that same $300 for 4 women (each at the equivalent 33%) at 133% output? Based on this, women would price men out of the market. This is basic economics and business. Whoever provides the best quality good or service at the lowest price wins. The employment arena holds little difference, if any. Whoever’s productivity matches or exceeds their wage rate wins. Thereby, with labor cost being the greatest portion of any business’ budget, the company that wins out in the employee market, has the best chance of winning out in the overall market. This renders profit the greatest equalizer against discrimination and, once again, further indicating that a lower wage for the same “work” benefits women making them more valuable to employers. Discrimination cost businesses money just as much as it cost employees. For instance, it only takes one company to recognize the advantage, employ all women, and out compete their competitors in price, quantity, and quality. The simple fact that there is no record of any company gaining a competitive advantage by implementing this method, proves that the pay differential is not due to prejudicial practices or a sexist disposition. Does the gap exist? Yes, it does, however, it is not a result of discrimination.
To further address this, one need only consider labor unions. The fundamental excuse people give for the necessity of a particular union is the fear of losing their job to someone who is willing to work for less money. A posture that disregards experience, productivity, or the simple fact that they, themselves, might merely be over priced in respect to their own position. This is the principle reason why many, if not most, unions came into existence. Not for the employee’s protection against the employer, rather it was for the laborer’s protection against other laborers – the minimization of competition between workers. During the late 1800s, many southern blacks were brought up north by white contractors to perform construction duties. These blacks fulfilled high quality work at a lower wage than the local northern whites. Because of which, many embittered northern whites plotted to see their jobs returned and pushed for a prevailing wage, unionization, and local hiring regulations. Once implemented, black labor participation in the construction industry plummeted, while white workers found themselves employed again. Seeking an artificial balance in wages has, historically, been a means of discrimination, where one group feels entitled to a particular job for a particular reason and, thereby, inhibiting the competition from other employees, who may be willing, for whatever reason, to work, that particular job, for a lower wage.
A generalization of male wages versus female wages is far too vague to hold any meaningful connotation. For example; marriage and children affect either gender differently. Woman inevitably must take time off during the final stage of their pregnancy to give birth, then recover and take care of their new born addition to the family. During which, the father maintains his work schedule in order to preserve the family’s subsistence. This pause in a woman’s occupation or career yields a dramatic impact on her earnings for that year. The data shows that child bearing has an adverse effect on a woman’s earnings, while augmenting a man’s income. Married men, on average, make more than never married men. Therefore, to compare married men and married women would give you two drastically different impressions without considering the circumstances. Another differing factor impacting men and women is the pursuit of divergent careers. Most occupations that are dependent on physical labor and/or hold a considerably high level of danger are typically held by men, while many part-time and flexible scheduling occupations are held by women. Jobs that are dangerous and physically strenuous tend to compensate the worker for their level of risk. Also, men, in any field, tend to work more hours than their female counterparts. This too has a significant impact on wage differences, further illustrating how jumping to discriminatory causations as a primary reason for such disparities can be ill founded when faced with a more holistic image of the issue.
There are enumerable intricacies that play a role in distinguishing the gender wage gap. When sifting through the data to find a comparable segment of male to female wages, we find that the most comparable group is never married men to never married woman. Interestingly enough, the data shows that woman, who have never been married, generally earn more than men, who have never been married. This fact runs contrary to the political and social narrative promoted throughout society. Statistics and numbers are important, however, what is more important is how they are broken down. Using generalized statistics is usually not the best means of determining the truth about a problem, if there is one, and a remedy, if there even needs to be one.
