Evidence of employers paying women 23% less than men for doing the same work is as elusive as Bigfoot sightings

From Mark Perry.

"There is widespread acceptance by the general public, especially among women, progressives and Democrats, of the completely bogus claim that women are paid “77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men,” in the words of President Obama. Hillary Clinton repackaged the bogus claim by stating recently that “On average, women need to work an extra two hours each day to earn the same paycheck as their male co-workers.” The National Committee on Pay Equity claims that women have to work until sometime in mid-April each year to earn the same amount of income a typical man made the previous year. A recent report from the World Economic Forum claims that it will take 118 years – until 2133 – to close the world gender pay gap

Despite the widespread acceptance of the “77 cents on the dollar for the same job” claim, there is rarely ever any specific evidence presented showing that specific firms are in violation of federal law by paying women 23% less than men for doing the same job. What Obama, Clinton and gender activists are really implying is that firms across the country are illegally violating the Equal Pay Act of 1963 by paying women 77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men, and those deliberate and ongoing violations are somehow going undetected. If there were such ubiquitous gender wage disparities in violation of federal law, why are there not extensive investigations by the Department of Justice or the Office of Civil Rights? And why isn’t there a cottage industry of law firms specializing in representing women who are victims of the supposed pervasive gender discrimination, the way there are hundreds of law firms representing mesothelioma victims who were exposed to asbestos on the job?

Just where do we find these companies that apparently have illegal dual-wage policies: one wage schedule for men and another one for women at wages 23% below their male co-workers for doing the same job? Where are the organizations that are paying women 23% less than men and exposing their organizations to legal prosecution, fines and penalties? Those questions are never answered by Obama, Clinton, the National Committee on Pay Equity, or the gender activists.

Well, let’s start by considering some examples of cases where it’s pretty clear that we would NOT find the kind of blatant gender discrimination that would result in women earning “77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.” Here are some of those examples:

1. Women-owned businesses. According to this report, there are nearly 9.1 million women-owned businesses in the United States, employing nearly 8 million workers or 1 of every 7 jobs in privately held firms. It seems highly unlikely that women would engage in the highly illegal and highly unethical activity of paying other women who work for them 23% less than their male co-workers. If the implication of “77 cents on the dollar” is that women are being victimized by employers, we wouldn’t accuse women of being the victimizers of other women, would we? Not likely.

2. Female CEOs. According to the BLS, there are 421,000 women holding the position of “Chief Executive” of their organization. Would these female CEOs have any tolerance for an illegal company compensation policy that paid female employees 23% less than their male co-workers for the same job? Not likely.

3. Union Members. In 2014, there were more than 16.2 million wage and salary workers represented by unions. Unions typically negotiate for pay based on seniority, not gender, and it would be impossible that unions would violate federal law by negotiating contracts with employers that called for paying women 23% less than men for the same position with the same seniority.

4. Workers Paid by Commission. There are almost 1 million real estate agents in the US who are paid by commission, and 55% of them are women. There are more than half a million insurance sales agents and nearly half of them are female. When compensation for these sales agents is primarily determined by commission, and those commissions are based on some percentage of sales volume, there doesn’t seem to be much support for any claims of a 23% gender pay gap in those industries. For example, when have you ever heard that “female realtors or insurance agents are paid 77 cents on the dollar for selling the same amount of real estate or insurance as their male colleagues”? Just what I though — never.

5. Government Employees. There are about 22 million Americans who work for the government at the federal (2.7million), state (5 million), and local level (14 million). Illegal discrimination by paying a female government employee 23% less than a man for doing the same government job? Not likely at all. Salaries are strictly determined by job classification, experience and seniority, and are clearly not gender-based.

6. Waiters and Waitresses. There are about 2 million waiters and waitresses in America, and nearly 72% are female. Because their compensation is based primarily on tips, I don’t think there could be any case made that “waitresses are paid 23% less on average than waiters for doing the same job, working the same number of hours, serving the same number of customers that generated the same dollar amount of sales.” Unless, of course, customers discriminate against women and give waiters tips that are 23% higher than the tips they leave for waitresses? Not likely.

7. Public School Teachers and College Professors. There are nearly 5 million teachers at the elementary and secondary level, and another 1.2 million college professors. Of course, some of these educators might also be represented in “Union Members” and “Government Employees” categories above, but when have you ever heard a female elementary school teacher or female college professor claim that they were being paid 23% less than their equally-qualified male colleagues? Never.

8. Human Resource Professionals. There are about 236,000 human resource managers in the US, and roughly 75% of them are female. Would it be even remotely possible that any of the nearly 200,000 female HR managers are engaged in illegal activity and violating federal law by paying other women in their organizations 23% less than men for the same position? Not likely.

9. Many Large Companies Have Females as Their Top HR Executive. For example, the top HR position at the Target Corporation — Executive Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer – is held by a woman; and five of Target’s top 11 executives are female. Any possibility that Target is violating the Equal Pay Act, exposing its organization to possible lawsuits, penalties and fines by paying female Target employees 23% less than men for the same job? Nope. Likewise, Walmart’s top two HR executives are women. Any possibility that those female HR executives would tolerate systematic illegal and unethical gender pay discrimination that would result in Walmart paying women 23% less than men and thereby expose the organization to lawsuits and investigations by the Office of Civil Rights? Not likely.

Of course, the list above is not exhaustive and does not completely cover all industries, all occupations, and all female workers, but it should challenge the narrative that women are routinely paid 23% less than men – across the board in all industries and for every occupation, even in firms owned or managed by women, or whose HR departments are headed by a woman.

So where are the organizations that have blatant dual-pay schedules that compensate women 23% less than men for the same job? In reality, those companies are as rare as a sighting of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster. And shouldn’t the nearly complete absence of any actual documented cases of women being paid 23% less than men for doing the same job lead us to reject the “77 cents on the dollar” myth once and for all? Apparently not. The myth just keeps getting recycled over and over again, and occasionally repackaged by Hillary Clinton and others. The fact that the myth is clearly unsupported by any actual evidence doesn’t seem to matter to most women nor to nearly all Democrats.

Perversely perhaps, maybe the false “77 cents on the dollar” narrative is actually perpetuated by the total lack of any evidence that any employers actually pay women 23% less than men for the same job. After all, it’s better to keep those mythical violations very vague, ambiguous, and undocumented as a way to keep the myth alive, like very rare sightings of Bigfoot. If the bogus myth of widespread 23% gender wage gaps throughout the economy was ever exposed to the sunlight of evidence and truth, it would wilt and disappear, no longer available as a popular issue to generate political support and votes from women.

So maybe it’s just the distant hope that someday there could be actual evidence of an organization paying women 23% less than men for doing the same work, or that there could someday be a sighting of Bigfoot, that keep those myths alive.

Bottom Line: If there are actually employers who are illegally paying women 23% less than men for doing the same job, those companies should be exposed, publicized and prosecuted. Just like if the Loch Ness monster and Bigfoot do actually exist, they should be exposed and publicized with video footage. But just like the elusiveness of actual evidence for Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster should make us question their existence, the elusiveness of any actual evidence of “77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men” should also make us question that unsubstantiated gender pay gap myth.

Unfortunately, the 23% gender pay gap for the same work claim is a statistical fraud that keeps getting recycled and promoted by politicians like Obama and Clinton because it apparently has a huge political payoff for uniformed voters. And it will continue to have a political payoff as long as average Americans, especially women, buy the statistical snake-oil promoted by Democrats that women are paid 23% less than men on average for doing the same job. Along with the myths of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster, the 23% wage gap claim is a myth that just won’t die, regardless, or maybe because of, the scant evidence."