"A NEW Zealand CEO, who sparked fury by saying that women were paid less than men because they took sick leave once a month, has been fired." Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/bus...th/story-e6frfm9r-1226089058126#ixzz1RIyVSskJ Unfair dismissal, or a justified sacking?
Hmm...if he can do his own job well, I don't like the idea of firing him because of his opinions. He should have been made to apologise and kept his job.
Don't you think that doing his job well might include making sure his employees are paid according to their merits and not their genders?
Does anyone have evidence that those women were not taking time off every 28 days? Where I worked, women took significantly more sick leave, excluding pregnancy-related time off, than men.
That is a ridiculous way to dertiman pay, it is gender discrimination just as much as anything else and as a CEO he should be able to relate to his employes, he derserves being fired.
Why should he have had to apologise? It is the plain truth, and it would be hard to have said it with any more politeness and respect towards women than he did.
Yeah, then prove it. His comments are sexist and underpaying women as compared to men may be illegal. (I don't know the laws where he is) If equality is the law, he is not doing his job. He has displayed a discriminatory approach.
Well frankly, the sick time (*)(*)(*)(*) is a load of rubbish. Every employee gets the same amount of "sick time". They don't give "extra time" to women, and it's just ridiculous to act like certain people can take "more" sick time.
He was fired for saying...what most likely is the truth in a general sense. I'm not sure about the "time of the month" innuendo. But what he said about sick kids are spot on. Anyone who says---that in a general statistical sense--- women don't take more time off due to other responsibilies....want to put facts under the rug.
When I was younger, I mentioned that sometimes women do not have the same opportunity for advancement in the workplace as men, and that it was not right. My grandmother actually butted in and told me plain out, "Well, it is an unfortunate fact of life, but women have their period every month and can get really cranky or sick. They also have family responsibilities that make it harder for them to work without taking time off." I was very surprised by this. The workplace is full of competition, and even a small disadvantage such as having a period once a month, or the possibility of stopping work in the future to start a family, are enough to measurably hinder women's ability to compete. There are also other subtle, but significant difference between the sexes that can make it difficult to differentiate between true discrimination based on sex, and valid differences in productivity/reliability. Women naturally have different interests than men, and this can be seen by differences in what they choose to study in college. In science/engineering classes, the guys are usually have a much more genuine interest in what they are doing then the girls, who a just taking the classes to meet school requirements, such as for going to medical school to meet the high expectations of their parents. There are some things that women are better at than men, unfortunately these things tend to be less appreciated in our capitalist society. More women now go to college than men, and the unemployment for young male adults is higher than that of females. How much more "equality" for women should society have? And many women actually expect their husbands to earn more, even if they cannot admit it. When the woman earns more than the man, it often cause problems in the relationship. The women typically begins to expect the man to "do more around the house". I know of one woman who left her husband because he "was not ambitious enough", even though he was earning the equivalent of 100,000 USD per year. Many women would be thrilled if their husband earned half this much. The real problem, of course, was that she earned four times as much as he did (she was a high powered corporate career law-woman). So many women want equality, but then turn around and complain when their husbands are do not earn more than them. And many women actually like being taken care of and not having to work as hard as their husbands. So of course women's pay will never be as high as men. Expecting men to take equal time looking after the baby, or to spend an equal ammount of effort cleaning the house and doing the dishes is just unrealistic. Men usually have somewhat lower standards of cleanliness than women. And women often like being more nurturing than men. This can be seen with pet ownership. Many more single women own pets than single men.
Statisticly you may be spot on. But statistics mean nothing to the individual. We should judge each person individualy by what they do. People should get payed what they deserve, gender should not matter.
All of that is just opinion, Anders. If the law required equality, it is his job to observe and implement the law. His company can be sued for anything other. Those comments leave his company open to that. Therefore he has not done his job and in that alone he is wrong. They need to replace the out of touch dinosaur with a woman who is up to speed with equality issues ...because that man is not up to the job. That apart, he's talking rubbish. Women hold down high powered jobs and you have indicated that in your own post. They don't get any more sick leave than anyone else, as Bender pointed out. So whatever he thinks, women are as capable as men in the workplace and are actively evidencing that every single day. As to child care, what is law regarding that? Do women have extra time off for sick children? Where I work, they do. Management is required to be supportive of working mothers and that policy came down from the top. A sick child can be deemed Domestic Emergency. I don't find that unreasonable. |The policy also came down from the government of the day, because they wanted women to return to work and actively encouraged that through child care allowances and other incentives. It seems to be working. As to issues over pay, people want to grow up. If you marry someone who makes more money it can be down to any number of circumstances and my be temporary. But why should women not work, so that men can have more opportunity? The days of women relying on men financially and having to take the selfish, domineering crap some of them give out, are over. Equality is just that, freedom from dependence. Men are optional in the home. If they want to be in a marriage/relationship, they are required to pull their weight. If they don't like that, you know the answer..
"Rudman and Phelan found no support for this hypothesis amongst their study participants. In fact, feminist women were more likely to be in a heterosexual romantic relationship than non-feminist women. The authors conclude that feminist stereotypes appear to be inaccurate, and therefore their unfavorable implications for relationships are also likely to be unfounded." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071015102856.htm
