Women didn't just drop out of the Software tech force in the 80's. What about all those personal computers marketed and targetted towards young nerds(ugmmmm boys)?
Software needs to be taught at grade level in an interesting way for people to catch on early. Natural biases and inclinations are just random noise unless we as people perpetuate them.
The gender disparity with interest in tech obviously starts from a much younger age, but that's a separate issue to address.
> But isn't the big elephant in the room the socio-economic and behavior bias created at a young age at homes and schools where gender roles are assigned very early?
Edit: I heard this story in the 80s when I was a kid. It may be real or not, but the point is the same. I'm still looking for the FWD: FWD: FWD: but I've never heard it again since the mid 80s.
No it didn't; the Baby Bells were created by the 1984 breakup of AT&T.
EDIT: As a sibling post provides details, the error was calling it a "Baby Bell"; the essence of the story, at least the lawsuit itself, is true, but Southern Bell was a pre-breakup Bell Operating Company (an AT&T subsidiary), not a post-breakup Baby Bell. [Errors like pointing to a Baby Bell 20ish years before they existed are often, but as this incident shows not always, signs of folk mythology.]
Also, you may hire based on talent, but still at a discount. Just because you can, and it is profit maximizing!
Personally, I'd rather keep the profits of my extra productivity for myself.
The ultimate goal is to allow women to take months or years off but still be pushed upward the same as men who do not take time off, while also subsidizing services used disproportionately by women: universal healthcare, paid daycare, job subsidies and government admin jobs, quotas on senior positions, massive equalization of salaries, free graduate level education, etc. Look to Scandinavia for a clue on what feminism wants to bring to the US.
While Norwegians certainly enjoy great healthcare, have you ever seen any competing startups offering SV or London salaries in Oslo? Guess why? Software engineers don't make a whole lot more than the HR employee or day care workers, especially once taxes are taken into consideration.
From the article, here is the money line:
Gusto also addressed its compensation policy. Since 2016 its salaries have been audited by Mercer, a human resources consulting firm, which has found no gender pay disparity. Benefits include 16 weeks of paid leave for a primary parent, plus an additional $100 a week for groceries and food deliveries, $100 a month for six months of housecleaning and up to $500 for a baby-sleep coach.
How many men do you think are the primary parent at most jobs? They also claim that 16 weeks of paid vacation given to some employees, but not others, means NO gender pay disparity.
Because the "staff them with only women" part is bright-line illegal, and because if you try to disproportionately attract women by being known for offering sub-scale salaries on the premise that men, with better average alternatives, will just not bother with you, then women won't either, because they'll assume that they'll also get lower salary than they would elsewhere.
Simply offer 89 cents salary for whatever field it is in, and naturally most of the qualified applicants will be women(because what man is going to take an 11 cent pay cut, and what woman wouldn't take a 12 cent pay raise?)
No, because if there is pervasive wage discrimination in the industry, then women will already be factoring that known discrepancy in when reading job listings and claimed salary ranges. They'll just assume that you are paying 89% of the average pay in the industry, with the usual 23% discount for being female.
It’s not about same job pay (4% difference there), it’s about the glass ceiling. Women are less likely to get promoted to higher paying positions and because of that are defacto less qualified.
So there can be an unfair pay gap without an obvious arbitrage situation.
And I do understand the issue - at least more than you give me credit for. If you see in my original post, I explicitly mention that these people are equivalently qualified.
People abuse the 77 cents on the dollar figure to say that equivalent employees get paid less if they are women, which is what I was trying to call out with my post.
From my reading of your post, it appeared you were arguing that the pay gap wasn't a thing at all. It is a common talking point, which is the reason for my (and maybe others) confusion. Anyway it seems it was a bad reading on my part.
Unfortunately, the language we're using is a bit too loose to be accurate. Equivalently qualified isn't a stand in for equivalently competent. If women are less likely to get promoted, they therefore are less likely to have as many qualifications as men.
This is an externality you would have to deal with, it would lead you to actually pick less qualified women to hire into promotions because there's a higher chance that they were passed over in favor of a man.
Uhh, yes, but your company probably does have a glass ceiling even if you are unaware of it and don’t want it.
A wise person would just stay out of these discussions. ;)
Old men probably didn't earn as much as the 20 year olds at the shipyard or meat packing plant, either.
Paying attention to how things are worded is a good first step. It fits with my experience of using less exclusionary language instead of intentionally inclusionary language. But the article fails to paint a compelling portrait of a company that genuinely has it figured out. It is not possible for me to determine if this is a defect in the writing or an indicator that they are running an experiment and don't actually know what they are doing with some kind of confidence (in the statistical sense).
When my fellow male engineers see that in a job ad, they avoid it like the plague.
> Now that 17 of Gusto's 70 engineers are female.
After a focused campaign to hiring women, Gusto's results are nowhere near 50/50. And they had to go out of their way to hire women and focus resources to attracting women.
The male engineers at Gusto were no doubt happy to see diversity, especially since Gusto did not drop their standards just because an applicant is female.
There's even more subtle phrasing in developer job postings that attracts men and discourages women, though. Even something as benign as "quarterly company retreats in the mountains" might discourage parents, probably women more than men.
It's unrealistic to expect a 50/50 distribution in the workforce when it's 80/20 in the academia.
Businesses should be free to hire who they want.
I'd love to see more female mechanics, electricians, carpenters and plumbers. In the US at least, those are well paying jobs.
And yes, more males should consider nursing and dental hygiene. Those are well paying jobs as well. Female nurses see and do some incredible things on a daily basis that any male would have no trouble respecting and admiring.
This is a bit disappointing. It reminds me of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's answer to "how many women on the Supreme Court would be enough?"
"When there are nine."
Men have been in a position of disproportionate power for so long it's unimaginable to be on the other end of the spectrum, but shooting for 18% representation of women will only uphold the current gender iniquities.
They should have aimed higher.
Imagine you run a pet clinic in a town of 5,125 people. Population: 2,500 women and 2,625 men. Of those 5,125 people - six of them have gone to school and became veterinarians. You're looking to hire four veterinarians to staff your pet clinic. You'd like to equally hire two men and two women. Five of the six local graduates are female and the only male graduate doesn't meet the qualifications you are looking for. You cannot afford or cannot find two male veterinarians who are willing to relocate to your small town and work at your clinic. In the end, you hire an entire female staff. Not because you're sexist - but because you simply can't. You don't have the funds necessary to bribe two men to move to a small town to work for your pet clinic.