Paycheck Fairness Act Blocked Again By Senate GOP by Laura Bassett | Huffington Post | Posted: 09/15/2014 6:59 pm EDT Excerpts: "Senate Republicans blocked for the fourth time a bill that would strengthen federal equal pay laws for women. The Paycheck Fairness Act would ban employers from retaliating against employees who share salary information with each other, impose harsher penalties for pay discrimination and require employers to be able to show that wage gaps between men and women are based on factors other than gender. The bill needed 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster and advance to a final vote on passage, but it fell short Monday by a vote of 52 to 40. Senate Democrats have brought the bill to the floor four times since 2011, and each time Republicans have rejected it. "The wage gap not only hurts our families, it hurts the economy," Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.)said before the vote. "If it were reversed, I'd be standing here fighting for the men. It's not right." Republicans say they oppose the bill because they believe it would discourage employers from hiring women, out of a fear of lawsuits. The GOP has accused Democrats of staging a "show vote" on the bill in an election year, knowing it won't pass. "At a time when the Obama economy is already hurting women so much, this legislation would double down on job loss, all while lining the pockets of trial lawyers," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)said before the last vote on the bill in April. "In other words, it's just another Democratic idea that threatens to hurt the very people that it claims to help." Women working full-time in the U.S. earn an average of 77 cents for every dollar men earn, according to the Census Bureau. A small portion of that gap, economists say, is due to employers paying women less than men for the same work." read: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/...5644.html?cps=gravity_2425_954152741673111909 ...... IMO: The terrible discrimination against women that the republicans have displayed makes one wonder if they actually believe that women are worth less in the business area than men, or is it just politics as usual in their toxic conspiracy to do nothing that will help President Obama. The great hatred, malevolence, and derision by the republicans toward their president has been tainting the very air of Washington for six years, and their only motive has been to have President Obama's legacy to be as absent of any worthwhile actions and full of fake charges to try to fool the public as to Obama's true actions as being inferior in execution. That women are also involved in this discrimination with no thought of "equality under the laws" has shown that any woman who is mentally on the same planet as republicans should be greatly enraged at their continued refusal to grant "equal pay for equal work" and of course, voting for any republican in the midterms should have been out of the question to any thinking woman. That any of them actually did should still be a growing mystery to females in America in year 2014.
"Republicans say they oppose the bill because they believe it would discourage employers from hiring women, out of a fear of lawsuits. The GOP has accused Democrats of staging a "show vote" on the bill in an election year, knowing it won't pass." Yeah; they're really trying to hurt women. No one is buying the "War on Women" BULL(*)(*)(*)(*) anymore. Ask Abortion Barbie.
Wage gaps aren't created by employers they're created by employees. Some people choose to be burger flippers, others choose to be doctors.
A article from September 16 2014 posted in current events, must be a slow day for the Huff and Puff post cut and paste posters. That war on women thing worked so well in the November primaries you just had to dust it off for 2015 lol
This, much like Immigration gets the same response: Uphold the laws already on the books. This is just more wasteful red tape, coming from the party that accused the Neo-Cons of red tape, it's truly hilarious! What the Democratic Party is essentially telling you is they don't mind cronyism, red tape and wasteful laws just as long as they uphold the Party Agenda. Let's use math to put it in perspective how the Democratic Party is arguing for crumbs: .77 to $1.00 is 23 cents. Yes, THAT'S IT. Now, the avg work hour is 9-10 hours. So .23 X 10=2.3 or $2.30. That's TWO DOLLARS and Thirty cents. But hey, let's do it by the 60 hour work week. Maybe that'll be some big number: .23 X 60=$13.80. Now, we're getting somewhere. If both workers work 60 hours a week, one is getting paid 72 hours worth while the other is at the base line average In short, OT pay has a HUGE stake in this(and I wouldn't be surprised if there are some scientific studies to back me up on this). Mothers naturally can't take as much OT time, because of children. This is circumstantial, not gender-oriented.
1. There is no gender pay gap for equivalent work in equivalent positions with equivalent experience. If there ever was a pay gap in that necessary context, it disappeared decades ago, and the prevalence of affirmative action and govjob welfare, overwhelmingly to women's benefit, suggest that the pendulum has swung far in the other direction. 2. We have had extensive laws in place against gender pay discrimination since the 60s. 3. Business compensation rates are the proprietary, legitimate trade secrets of companies, part of their intellectual property. Hindering their ability to keep such data private creates all sorts of problems in competitiveness. 4. Such laws are indeed counterproductive. In the current regulatory regime, I'd never hire a female employee as it is, let alone under bogus left-feminist grandstand lawyer welfare like Fair Paycheck. 5. As a matter of the NLRA, employees are already allowed to openly discuss working conditions and job specifics on social media and elsewhere, not the amount of pay though, and for very good reason. 6. Feminists, and a certain segment of women who claim to be against feminism, yet are happy to sit back and rake in discriminatory benefit, tend to believe that equality in pay means merely equal pay outcomes. This is childish and banal. Even leftists should be able to recognize that a whole host of issues go into formulating what to pay a specific person, experience, personality, work ethic, corporate citizenship, not gender, and differences between two people of different genders can't be presumed to be due to discrimination. Trying to make private sector pay all about paygrades like government pay, "this position earns this" is typical ignorant fallacy of leftists who don't understand the private sector and competitive business operations. 7. As another poster points out, and OP confirms in her screed by offering no facts, just the same stale talking points, this issue is all partisan show, trying to claim "war on women" by the GOP that doesn't exist, and trying to buy more votes from the left's most cherished skew bloc, ignorant, younger single female voters. 8. These types of laws, Fair Paycheck and Lilly Ledbetter, do benefit one group of people quite handsomely... lawyers. Anyone who supports such laws needs to just sent a fat check to their local sue-happy law firm, because that's exactly who these types of laws are crafted to benefit, not "women," but heavy leftist lawyer contributors.
We don't need ANOTHER law saying the same sh1t. Of course anyone sensible would vote against it. Then again Democrats didn't try to pass a bill for anything other than smearing the other side. Can you say Chicago politics? Can you say scummy? Can you say underhanded? Can you say trying to fool the sheeple and uneducated voter? Yup. The left is classless as usual.
http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB...6250672504707048.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read http://consad.com/content/reports/Gender Wage Gap Final Report.pdf Your wish is my command. I also wonder how many leftists read the misleading title of the law and then ignorantly stop there and say, "well I'm all for fairness!" Don't be gullible sheep, folks. This is not a "Fair Paycheck Act" at all, and neither was Lilly Ledbetter, but a "Give Lawyers More Frivolous Lawsuit Ammunition Act." These unnecessary laws cost companies hundreds of millions in compliance costs, maybe even billions, that they might otherwise use to HIRE YOU, YOUR FAMILY or someone you know. Think on that before blindly toeing the leftist line. Our time-tested, preexisting laws on gender discrimination in the workplace are thorough and adequate to address any wrongdoing. Here's a law I can get behind, the "Accuracy in Legislative Titles" law, or else we'll be seeing laws like the "Anti Human Suffering Act," the "Feed the Hungry Act," and the "World Peace Act." Seriously folks, don't be fooled, regardless of political orientation. We are being lied to.
I take it your assuming that all mothers have young children? If so, this is a fallacy on your part. Some mother's children are grown so there is no reason why they cannot make overtime like men.
Men work far more overtime than women, it's a fact, yet all labor over 30 hours a week is accounted as "fulltime" by the government, meaning that a man who works 50 hours a week benefits from a "pay gap" over the woman in the adjoining cubicle working 35 hours "for the same work." No squirming around this, all facts, the sources I linked reference these plain facts.
No one is buying the racism crap why do you think they will buy the war on women leftist bile? I think working women being forced to pay more money for less coverage for their childrens healthcare will find the war on women waged from the left. I know because I hear them say so.
..... An article with a certain date attached does guarantee an ongoing war against women, but only an idiot would say that it has not prevailed and is still of prime interest to republicans who have a 50's attitude toward women which is obsolete and denigrating to the real lives of American women. Proof of this was especially evident when the Oversight Committee held an inquiry last year on the plight of women in America today ..and there was not one woman in attendance to speak for women. Having control over our own bodies instead of Congressional mandates, receiving the same pay that males get for doing the same work, being discriminated against for becoming pregnant, protection against college rape, are just a few crucial things that women expect in today's world when many are sole providers for their families, but continue to be discriminated against by their employers and Congress.. You are just angry that every article I submit has been vetted, with any errors promptly rectified ASAP, and you have difficulty in rebutting any article I submit because they have nothing in them that you can successfully rebut. The articles are all excepts...look up the word and become educated. hint: Instead of using insults to knock an article I submit, try to rebut what my article in saying, because insults will get you nowhere; it just proves what you are.
It's really simple. Corporations, if they were as notoriously greedy as they are said to be, and if the premise of this 'fairness' swindle here were true, could increase their profits vastly by FIRING EVERY MAN who works for them and HIRE ONLY WOMEN. Easy! They're exactly interchangeable, right???? But they don't seem to be doing that. Hmmm... wonder why that is.
Good. The voluntary negotiation process should not be obstructed by state or Federal law. Leave people alone. [hr][/hr] Furthermore, assuming you want this sort of thing - it's absolutely inexcusable and totalitarian to do it at the national level. There is no argument to be made about externalities seeping into other states - it's purely a "well, we want to force everyone to have the same policy" thing. It's not enough for tyrants to have what they want for themselves and everyone else who doesn't agree in a 500 mile radius - they have to have to force it on everyone in the country. And eventually, everyone in the world. Sovereignty on internal policy has moved from the state level to the Federal level - it's only a matter of time before the fascists decide they can't tolerate any diversity in policy anywhere in the planet. And what do they do when others disagree and forcefully reject their colonization? They go to war. They did it when the states tried it, eventually they'll do it when nations try it in defiance of "international law". Oh (*)(*)(*)(*) - now you're a warmongering right-wing war hawk. Go figure.
republicans never defend the working class, now the corps and the 1% they will bend over backwards for
