I’m not going to get on my soapbox yet again about fair pay for women. If you know me, you know where I stand on that — like it should be so controversial an idea to pay people equally for the same work! Mon Dieux!
In case you need a refresher, I give you the words of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg, in her written dissent in the Ledbetter case, as to why the passage of this legislation is so crucially important:
The [Court] … overlooks common characteristics of pay discrimination. Pay disparities often occur, as they did in Ledbetter’s case, in small increments; cause to suspect that discrimination is at work develops only over time. Comparative pay information, moreover, is often hidden from the employee’s view. Employers may keep under wraps the pay differentials maintained among supervisors, no less the reasons for those differentials. Small initial discrepancies may not be seen as meet for a federal case, particularly when the employee, trying to succeed in a nontraditional environment, is averse to making waves.…
Ledbetter’s evidence demonstrated that her current pay was discriminatorily low due to a long series of decisions reflecting Goodyear’s pervasive discrimination against women managers in general and Ledbetter in particular.
I could love a reality where men stopped discriminating against women, where the system couldn’t be gamed anymore to surreptitiously pay women less so that men’s egos could feel better because they are earning more than the little ladies or because male supervisors just don’t think a woman would ever be as qualified as a man at anything.
I realize there might not be a lot of ratings for Bravo TV in a reality like that, but it’s time in real life. I tried to explain to PunditGirl the other day that sometimes men and women aren’t paid the same amount of money for doing the same work.
Her simple question back to me should be the one posed to Ledbetter’s supervisors and others like them — WHY?