With all the talk in the news about equal pay for equal work laws, I feel it necessary to share my view. Amidst all of the talk from the left saying that the right is launching a "war on women," I seek to respond to such accusations by saying it is the Liberals, the advocates of equal pay laws, that are launching this war. The left is essentially defeating the purpose of equal pay laws, by having equal pay laws; let me explain.
Let us first ask a question: What is the point of equal pay for equal work laws? I think it is fair to say that the reason for an equal pay law is to stifle the sexist boss. One of the main reasons for having this law is to stop employers from being sexist; from selecting a man to do a job simply because he likes working with men better, even though the woman is just as qualified, or even slightly more qualified. The other (obvious) goal is to get the women that do get hired the same wage as their male counterparts. Fair objectives, I don't object to the idea whatsoever, but most people look at this issue in terms of the cause (the cause is good), and not the actual effect it has (which is where we need to be looking). With an equal pay for equal work law, a given employer bears no cost for being sexist, whereas right now, without the law, he does. If "If Boss Man Jim" has to choose between two resumes, he is presumably going to pick the most qualified employee. So, let us look at a scenario. "Boss Man Jim" needs a new accountant on the team. He receives several applications, but two stand out from the crowd; the resume from John, and the one from Jennifer. Both John and Jennifer went to Stanford, they both have a BA in accounting, both graduated with a 3.9 GPA, both interned at the same company for the same time and got similar reviews, but Jennifer, in addition, was on the board of Stanford's accounting club. Jennifer is ever so slightly placed ahead of Jim in terms of experience. Now, "Boss Man" can hire Jim for $100,000 a year, or Jennifer for $80,000 a year (because that is the rate she charges). If "Boss Man" is smart, even if he is sexist, he will hire Jennifer. She costs less and is slightly more qualified to do the job. So if "Boss Man" is sexist, he must go against all logic and hire a slightly less qualified employee, AND pay him an additional $20,000. Here is where things get interesting. If we do have equal pay for equal work laws, "Boss Man" HAS to pay Jennifer the same as John. Now, if "Boss Man" is a sexist employer, he bears no cost to be sexist and doesn't have to defy logic to hire John. His reasoning goes like this: "Well I could pay John $100,000 to work here, or I could pay Jennifer $100,000 to work here... Seeing as how I bear no cost, I might as well select John, I like working with men better."
The cumulative effect of Equal Pay laws is to keep women out of new professions. We should instead let the free markets run their course. If women's skills are proven to be equal or higher in a certain field they will be paid the same or even more. Two great examples of that are nursing and therapy. We have to get a sense of proportion. Under oppressive circumstances (and it is unfortunate that it was this way) women have not been in the workforce that long. It takes time to develop these skills. I Believe that women ARE equal to men. I believe they have the exact same capacity to lead a company just as good as a man or better if they have the drive to do it. This is exactly why I will fight equal pay laws. I will fight these equal pay laws because I wish to see equal pay for equal work.
No comments:
Post a Comment