When claming that one s*x works as hard as the other, what would be a fair test of the work done?

Question

We often hear of pay inequality. But is it only cosy jobs that’s been referred to here, do it extend to all Jobs?

Should we attempt to test EVERY job, for gender ability?

Would some be upset if it turned out that ‘a gender’ couldn’t actually cope with some job?

Do you notice jobs that you’re opposite s*x won't ever go for. and WHY?

Answer 1

I say ... "job well done ... job well paid" ... doesn't matter what gender has completed it....

there is no need to test some jobs for gender ability ... I am sure I would not make a good builder...bouncer...football player...road digger...or any other job involving heavy lifting etc....

I would not be upset...I dont really fuss about these things...just get on with my life....

and men would not really enjoy doing facials or waxing in beauty salons...looking after babies...and other girly jobs...lol...

ofcrs there are always some individuals who will be capable of doing a job intended for the opposite s*x and actually enjoy it...now if they do the job the same way as the opposite s*x...then the pay should be the same....

OMG...KING...you always manage to bring on a headache ....lol...

hope my answer is satisfactory...

Answer 2

"Gender Ability"?  lol.  That's like testing Blacks to see if they are literate enough in White culture to be allowed to vote.  Whites did that, you know.  In high school, right in the middle of race riots in St. Louis, I feel in love with a 19 year old Black high school drop-out, Rickie.  He was the second greatest man in my life.  My father's first.  Rickie and I were like "FORBIDDEN" back then but I was so young, "white bread" and naive I actually didn't even know that.  Race never came up except when he took his GED test, passed and then took the ACT.  He was ready for that test.  He was by far the sharpest man I've known.  When he emerged from the test, for the first time in our relationship, I saw "Black Man" on his face, not Rickie . . . but race.  Something wrong happened during the test.  He wouldn't discuss it with me.  He walked out in the middle of the test, got drafted that summer and died the first week he was in Nam.

I took the ACT that spring and bawled all the way through it.  I saw what had happened.  That test was so f*cking racist then it would make you puke.  There were "cultural" questions one after another that hinged testing "intelligence" on POLO, on White-Only then sports like GOLF, on White-Only resorts, on White only music.  Thanks to the Civil Rights movement and affirmative action to overcome White slimy undermining bigotry, our consciousness was raised and such tests have come under much fairer scrutiny.  But, anytime some moron starts whining for a "cultural" test, like one for "gender ability" (?), my hackles go up.

I own an international educational consultant company and I present to Board of Directors all over the world about exactly the kinds of ways or tests that you are asking about.  Guess what? Those "tests" all indicate that female employees are by far the better workers and are by far the most profitable long-term.  It's that "long-term" finding that larger, more powerful and influencia companies are focusing intently on.  For example, as reported here on Yahoo News recently, the more females on a Board of Directors, the more profitable the company.  All research clearly shows males goof off more than females at work and even on the Board of Directors, and that working female employees do at least twice as much work at home as do their working husbands.  Big Business has noticed.  Those "gender ability tests" are out-of-control and Big Business, ever fond of fine-tuning that profit margin to the penny, is swinging hard and heavy in favor of investing in female employees now, especially in the global job market.

Females may very well be "superior" employees when measured in those massive testings.  But, I examine those tests and the SAME thing is occuring in "gender ability" testing as happened in "White culture" tests back in the 60's.  Who SAYS chess playing skills, for example, are an indicator of potential profitability of an employee?  (As it turns out, it's NOT).  Fancy that.  Big Business and industrial psychologists are scrambling to identify better indicators, not to "help" females in a move toward fairness, but because all those archaic notions of "male gender superior ability" based on "Polo" cultural so-called criteria aren't panning out profit-wise.  Those sacred patriarchal indicators of superiority turn out, in massive commerical research, to be nothing more that acculturated delusional ARROGANCES and blatherings that Big Business no longer buys into.

Equally qualified job candidates, one who writes in his job application,"football captain, member of the English-Only movement, high school chess champ, state varsity basketball awards, and male anatomy", and one candidate who writes, "Habitat for Humanity volunteer, fluent in three languages, Toastmaster's International, and female anatomy (or "superior gender ability" as that translates these days in human resources).  Which so-called "equally qualified" candidate would get the cushy, $176,000 starting pay in an international company in the REALITY of the global job market?  

I educate employers about how better to identify and educate the best people.  My method works, it's "gender" fair and it's making money for me.  But, the tide toward BS "female gender ability superiority" on that corporate level is taking off like wildfire and there's no stopping it.  Would YOU be "upset" if YOUR gender couldn't actually cope with the job? You're gonna be.  lol

Answer 3

The principle behind pay is simple - the fewer people who are capable of doing the job the higher the salary. The reason that women are paid less is because they choose to do jobs that nearly everyone is capable of doing like childcare or low skilled office work. If they want equal pay they need to skill up.

Answer 4

Why are we testing on genders? If one man or woman can do a theoretical job well, should we prevent them based on the rest of their genders inability to do that job? Or judge them as an individual? I would be upset if someone judged my abilities on that of my gender in one sample, and I suspect so would anyone else.

In terms of working hard (and outside of the pay equality issue) - how would you wieght actual paid work versus non-paid work? I.e. child raising, which means you can't work late in the office.

Answer 5

EQUAL work, EQUAL pay.

if you don't do the work as well as someone else, then no you shouldn't be paid the same. but that shouldn't be based on gender, it should apply to everyone. i work for a union electrical construction company and we have different pay scales. the guys (or girls) who are better get moved up to foremen and they get more pay!

Answer 6

no if that happened us men would be on far less money have you ever took into account how much work a women does most do a full days work and keep a house running i help my wife as much as i can around the house but where they get the energy from god only knows  our trouble is we take them for granted

Answer 7

I know my 'opposite s*x' won't go for child-rearing, arguably the hardest (and one of the most important) jobs ever.

You really need to define "hard." There's physical hard, intellectual hard, and all levels of difficult, including organization, task management, people skills, work ethic, and pay-rate for the job.

And I would like to see your statistics/reference on pay inequality only referring to 'cosy' jobs. Which jobs are those?

Answer 8

I base equality in the workplace on productivity and output.

Answer 9

male cant have kids is one major point favouring the female