Consider the following report from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research:
“Women are almost half of the workforce. They are the equal, if not main, breadwinner in four out of ten families. They receive more college and graduate degrees than men. Yet, on average, women continue to earn considerably less than men. In 2015, female full-time workers made only 79 cents for every dollar earned by men, a gender wage gap of 21 percent. Women, on average, earn less than men in virtually every single occupation for which there is sufficient earnings data for both men and women to calculate an earnings ratio.”
DB’s ranted on about this before: (2013)
“Women are having a tough time in the present economy, and the situation isn’t made any better by the wage gap. NPWF reports: ” In Nevada, on average, a woman who holds a full-time job is paid $35,484 per year while a man who holds a full-time job is paid $41,803 per year. ” (pdf) This has some very real economic consequences for the state since 125,402 households in Nevada are headed by women. In 32,479 of those households the income is below the poverty line. Thus 25.89% of those households are barely getting by.”
And on the GOP filibuster of the Paycheck Fairness Act (2014). However, it really is necessary to broaden the discussion – equal pay for equal work is not just a “woman’s issue,” nor is it a “family issue.” It’s an economic issue.
Once more, let’s look at the reality of what happens when men and women aren’t paid equally for equal work.
In the state of Nevada right now, the average annual wage for a food service manager is $62,160. Pay ranges from $18.51 per hour to $46.97 per hour with a mean wage of $29.89/hr. [NDETR calc] Let’s keep all the variables such as experience, tenure, and specialization, the same, and concentrate solely on what would happen if two people of the same level of experience, expertise, and skills were to be paid based on gender. Let’s have our hypothetical male food service manager paid the annual average of $62,160 per year. This means that our hypothetical female food service manager would receive 79% of that, or $49,106.
If both our male and female food service managers were being paid $62,160 per year, and if both were in the same household then the household income would be $124,320. Now, here’s why this is an economic issue and not merely a “gender” one.
If our male and female food service managers are paid along the lines of the 79 cents for every dollar that holds nationally, then the total household income is reduced. That $124,320 in total household income drops to $112,266, a reduction in income of $12,054.
That $12,054 is money NOT spent at the grocery store, or at the furniture store, or the clothing store, or at the restaurant, or the automobile dealership, or the carpet center, or the movie theater. It is NOT spent on educational expenses, books, and Internet service. It is NOT spent on sporting goods, family entertainment, or automobile parts and service. It is NOT spent at the florists’ shop, or the cabinet-maker’s store, or the barber shop, or the beauty salon. It can’t be spent because they don’t have it.
The only way to avoid talking about this simple arithmetic is to prattle on about “Job Creators” and the Trickle Down Economics Hoax. “Supply side economics” is a theory in search of statistics – it doesn’t work in the real world, and it never has. If there is no demand for goods or for a service, there will be no jobs created. And, there will be no demand IF people don’t have the money to spend for those goods and services.
Once more, here’s the First Law of Personnel Management:
How are businesses in this country supposed to SUSTAIN demand for goods and services if the female employees in the country, who are doing the same jobs as their male counterparts, aren’t able to contribute the same amount to the family’s disposable income?
So, tell me, how do we grow the economy of the United States of America, an economy based in no small part of consumer spending, if we artificially limit the amount of income contributed to family coffers by women?
There are 123 million women ages 16 and above in the United States, and 72 million (58.6%) are working or looking for work. Women are now 47% of the total U.S. labor force, and they are projected to account for 51% of the increase in the total labor force between 2008 and 2018. 73% of employed women are working full time, while 27% are employed on a part time basis. [DoL]
We are no longer talking about the “little woman” working outside the home for some ‘pocket money.” We are talking about two-income families, both incomes being necessary to move toward the middle class life style or to maintain it. If a family of four, with an annual income of $112,266 lives in the Las Vegas metropolitan area, their income is comparable to 56% of those adults in that area. That’s the middle. [Pew Calculator] Diminish the second income and we diminish the whole.
Diminish the whole and we diminish the potential for economic growth. Equal pay for equal work is simply dollars toward a stronger economy and old fashioned common sense.