Community Chat

[pinkskates4]

On 5/15/2014 adelle38 said:

"So then I guess you automatically assume there is no pay discrimination in private companies as well. That they base pay on experience and contributions, and salary negotiations etc."

New Flash! The New York Times IS a private company.

Yes, and do others get your benefit of the doubt as well - that was the question.

[pinkskates4]

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

[pinkskates4]

Interesting article. Looks like the Times is admitting that her salary complaint is at least ""part"" of the reason they fired her.

Sounds like reprisal to me (which is also illegal under the Equal Pay Act)- even if she was wrong about the salary discrimination (and it doesn't seem that she was - despite their protests.)

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/05/jill-abramson-and-the-times-what-went-wrong.h...

[biancardi]

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

I am not giving the times a pass. If she is doing the same work, with the same amount of experience and knowledge, she should be making the same pay.

We all know that women are not being paid equally for doing the exact job, with the same qualifications and experience as men.

[pinkskates4]

On 5/16/2014 biancardi said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

I am not giving the times a pass. If she is doing the same work, with the same amount of experience and knowledge, she should be making the same pay.

We all know that women are not being paid equally for doing the exact job, with the same qualifications and experience as men.

Good.

I am amazed that they admit that her complaint about her pay was part of the reason they fired her.

Do they not know that reprisal is illegal - and it's illegal whether or not the original complaint (for which they then took the reprisal) has any merit or not.

[brii]

I think it's a given that if "they" can get by paying someone less, they will.

[occasionalrain]

On 5/16/2014 Dagna said:

On 5/16/2014 biancardi said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

I am not giving the times a pass. If she is doing the same work, with the same amount of experience and knowledge, she should be making the same pay.

We all know that women are not being paid equally for doing the exact job, with the same qualifications and experience as men.

Good.

I am amazed that they admit that her complaint about her pay was part of the reason they fired her.

Do they not know that reprisal is illegal - and it's illegal whether or not the original complaint (for which they then took the reprisal) has any merit or not.

Most companies require employees to sign a confidentiality agreement that prohibits the employee from disclosing their salary, including the company that employs me. This woman violated the agreement which is grounds for termination.

[occasionalrain]

On 5/16/2014 biancardi said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

I am not giving the times a pass. If she is doing the same work, with the same amount of experience and knowledge, she should be making the same pay.

We all know that women are not being paid equally for doing the exact job, with the same qualifications and experience as men.

The job may be the same but how it's carried out can be very different.

No two employees are the same, some need more direction, some complain about their work load, some take time off during times when there is a heavier work load which dumps work on fellow employees, some spend time conducting personal business during work hours, some dress inappropriately, some gossip...

[biancardi]

On 5/16/2014 occasional rain said:

On 5/16/2014 biancardi said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

I am not giving the times a pass. If she is doing the same work, with the same amount of experience and knowledge, she should be making the same pay.

We all know that women are not being paid equally for doing the exact job, with the same qualifications and experience as men.

The job may be the same but how it's carried out can be very different.

No two employees are the same, some need more direction, some complain about their work load, some take time off during times when there is a heavier work load which dumps work on fellow employees, some spend time conducting personal business during work hours, some dress inappropriately, some gossip...

again, the same qualifications and experience.

what you described does not fall into those categories.

[pinkskates4]

On 5/16/2014 occasional rain said:

On 5/16/2014 Dagna said:

On 5/16/2014 biancardi said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

Gotta love how some of the same folks who claim there is a war on women and that women are discriminated against as to pay - are quick to give the Times a pass.

Now why would that be?

Hmmm.

I am not giving the times a pass. If she is doing the same work, with the same amount of experience and knowledge, she should be making the same pay.

We all know that women are not being paid equally for doing the exact job, with the same qualifications and experience as men.

Good.

I am amazed that they admit that her complaint about her pay was part of the reason they fired her.

Do they not know that reprisal is illegal - and it's illegal whether or not the original complaint (for which they then took the reprisal) has any merit or not.

Most companies require employees to sign a confidentiality agreement that prohibits the employee from disclosing their salary, including the company that employs me. This woman violated the agreement which is grounds for termination.

I'm not sure that she disclosed her salary to anyone prior to complaining to management about it - and the fact that someone disclosed her predecessor's salary to her would not be her fault.

Additionally, I can't see how a confidentiality clause trumps illegal wage discrimination (if in fact, that is the case). That would make the Equal Pay Act meaningless.

And finally, - again - retaliation for filing a wage or s*x discrimination complaint is a violation of both the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Pay Act. And it doesn't matter if the original allegation of discrimination has merit or not. The act of taking reprisal for merely filing it is illegal.

UPDATE - I just reread the article and apparently the Times has now realized its error in admitting reprisal.

The spokeswoman is now disputing that she said the pay complaint is part of the reason Abramson was fired - altho the New Yorker reporter says her original quote is accurate. Apparently the Times lawyers read the article and told the spokeswoman to recant - and quickly.