Humphries gets paid HOW MUCH? Credit - public domain

Because if they earn less than men in a free country, that’s the right question.

The answer to the question more commonly asked – “Why do employers pay women less?” is very simple:

 

BECAUSE THEY CAN

You have to be as dumb as a climate change retard to not understand this really – employers will not pointlessly pay their employees more than they believe the employee wants to do the work.

What sensible entrepreneur ever thinks to herself “I know Debbie will be happy to be the office manager for £20,000, but why don’t I just pay her £25,000 anyway and not worry about what I could have spent that extra £5,000 on?”

No sensible entrepreneur ever, that’s who.

I’m not even sure I can comprehend the Leftie position on this, because it is so moronic as to defy analysis.

Their position appears to be “Business owners should not be responsible and pay each worker as little as possible for labour, or even generous and pay each worker a generous salary in the hope it will generate loyalty and harder work, but grossly irresponsible and just pay everyone the same regardless of effort, circumstance or demand.”

If Debbie wants £25,000 because she has a lengthy commute and has other offers, but Dave only wants £22,000 because he lives next door and really wants the company name on his cv, that’s doesn’t matter. Even if that’s the pay they ask for.

Pay them both the same.

This thinking is so superficial and retarded that no sensible human that has ever worked at a real job in the private sector can even comprehend it and its utter absurdity.

And of course that’s the problem right there – the people who dreamt up this shit have never worked in the real world in their lives. They are all public sector workers, unable to imagine that somewhere outside the influence of the state, real people negotiate the price of their labour freely without the dreary recourse to equality legislation.

They are coccooned in a grey bubble and as they peer out through its walls, the world looks grey to them.

Subscribe to The CT Mailer!

3
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
3 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
john77Spikejgh Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
jgh
Member
jgh

And that person holding that sign in the picture should either be sued for libel, or should be in court giving evidence in an unfair pay prosecution. They do realise that different pay for the same work has been illegal since NINETEEN SEVENTY FIVE! And nothing to do with the CM, EEC, EC or EU as we ourselves managed to work this out for ourselves in 1970.

If you’re EARNING less it’s because you’re DOING less. If you want to EARN more, then DO more.

Spike
Member

That a woman agrees to work for some amount should be evaluated only on whether the decision was voluntary — not about what social message it sends about All Wimmin or about All Employers.

Every government’s Wage And Hour Division is complete dead weight on the economy — especially the division in my state, which extends the provisions of federal law to businesses with fewer than 10 employees, which the federal law doesn’t cover. As there are plenty of businesses paying at least the federal minimum, why should there be no start-ups anywhere paying less?

john77
Member
john77

In 50 years I’ve never been paid more than a woman doing the same amount of comparable work to the same standard – ah, that’s the problem isn’t it? OK, 40-odd years ago I was paid more than some women doing comparable work – but my job included checking and correcting their mistakes (for all three of them) so I had to do less writing but as many calculations as the three of them put together to a higher quality standard. For the next twenty-odd years there was no female comparator (there were two or three doing parallel jobs for… Read more »