RE: Binders full of women

RE: Binders full of women (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 11:58:53 AM)
and your point is exactly what? That it takes a woman to point out the "inequalities" in way to many workplaces? Or are you trying to distract from the fact that I was talking about Congress' republican men?

chatterbox24 -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 12:01:26 PM)
Oh just vote for Obama, and be done with it. Thats what I am doing. Blah.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 12:03:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Since 2010 They Blocked Obamas Jobs bill in 2011 They Blocked Wallstreet reform, They Blocked AND defeated the Fair Pay act They Blocked the Dream Act, They Blocked the Anti Rape Amendment They Blocked the Small Business Jobs Act not once but TWICE They Blocked the repeal of Dont Ask Dont Tell numerous times then only with the support of 2 Repubs They Blocked the Benefits for Homeless Vets They Blocked the the Health care for 9/11 First Responders They Blocked the Political Ad Disclosure Bull TWICE They Blocked the Tax on companies that ship jobs overseas They Blocked the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act(well attempted to) They Blocked Oil Spill liability They Blocked the Immigration reform They voted 33 times to repeal the Affordable care act Please dont ignore all those facts either Actually it has been brought up about the fair pay injustice. but is ignored by most republican men as just being more "whitewash" In all fairness, they renamed 60 some post offices. ED for typo

Yachtie -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 1:09:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic and your point is exactly what? That it takes a woman to point out the "inequalities" in way to many workplaces? Or are you trying to distract from the fact that I was talking about Congress' republican men? MSNBC doesn't need Congress' republican men to equalize pay. You though, in order to feel good about yourself, do need Congress' republican men to force liberal MSNBC to bend to your wishes. And what's funniest is that you don't even work for MSNBC. You're such a do-gooder[:'(] ... helping others to do what they could do themselves if they wanted to

DomKen -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 1:45:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? WH staff are paid according to their job classification. So it simply is not true that women are paid less than men for the same work in the WH.

Baroana -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 1:49:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? WH staff are paid according to their job classification. So it simply is not true that women are paid less than men for the same work in the WH. I think it is being insinuated that on balance, the women hold lower grade positions, but thanks for playing.

tazzygirl -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 1:59:24 PM)
Wait.... 14 times less? Her income is 2 million His 4 million 14 times less?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 2:08:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? And why did Mittens have a higher percentage of female staffers than any SITTING Dem governor. AND THIS WHOLE THING WOULD NOT HAVE COME UP, YOU OLD FOOL, IF THE WORD PORTFOLIO HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED FOR BINDER. Geez,get a clue, will ya Unless there is proof that women get paid less for the same position and with the same amount of experience, the $11,000/yr. number is meaningless. It'd be like asking you if a guy was obese because his weight was 300#. Obviously, you could guess and have a 50/50 chance of being correct, but you wouldn't know unless you knew how tall the guy was and who the guy was. Lou Ferrigno is not obese and he was up to 300#.

Baroana -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 2:10:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? And why did Mittens have a higher percentage of female staffers than any SITTING Dem governor. AND THIS WHOLE THING WOULD NOT HAVE COME UP, YOU OLD FOOL, IF THE WORD PORTFOLIO HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED FOR BINDER. Geez,get a clue, will ya Unless there is proof that women get paid less for the same position and with the same amount of experience, the $11,000/yr. number is meaningless. It'd be like asking you if a guy was obese because his weight was 300#. Obviously, you could guess and have a 50/50 chance of being correct, but you wouldn't know unless you knew how tall the guy was and who the guy was. Lou Ferrigno is not obese and he was up to 300#. What proof are you looking for? Been to the courthouse lately?

Lucylastic -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 5:29:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chatterbox24 Oh just vote for Obama, and be done with it. Thats what I am doing. Blah. Im not american

Lucylastic -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 5:30:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic and your point is exactly what? That it takes a woman to point out the "inequalities" in way to many workplaces? Or are you trying to distract from the fact that I was talking about Congress' republican men? MSNBC doesn't need Congress' republican men to equalize pay. You though, in order to feel good about yourself, do need Congress' republican men to force liberal MSNBC to bend to your wishes. And what's funniest is that you don't even work for MSNBC. You're such a do-gooder[:'(] ... helping others to do what they could do themselves if they wanted to I dont need congress to do anything I want them to I dont need MSNBC to do what I need them to do Im such a do gooder with a sadistic heart SUE me [8\|]

DesideriScuri -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 6:12:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? And why did Mittens have a higher percentage of female staffers than any SITTING Dem governor. AND THIS WHOLE THING WOULD NOT HAVE COME UP, YOU OLD FOOL, IF THE WORD PORTFOLIO HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED FOR BINDER. Geez,get a clue, will ya Unless there is proof that women get paid less for the same position and with the same amount of experience, the $11,000/yr. number is meaningless. It'd be like asking you if a guy was obese because his weight was 300#. Obviously, you could guess and have a 50/50 chance of being correct, but you wouldn't know unless you knew how tall the guy was and who the guy was. Lou Ferrigno is not obese and he was up to 300#. What proof are you looking for? Been to the courthouse lately? Haven't been to a courthouse since May, though I'm not sure what the fuck that has to do with anything. I'd like to see a direct comparison of the salaries according to position. If you compare a female secretary's salary to a male CFO's salary, you could come to the conclusion that she is underpaid. But, if you take into account that they aren't the same position, it doesn't point to any conclusion about gender pay discrepancy.

Baroana -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 6:15:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? And why did Mittens have a higher percentage of female staffers than any SITTING Dem governor. AND THIS WHOLE THING WOULD NOT HAVE COME UP, YOU OLD FOOL, IF THE WORD PORTFOLIO HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED FOR BINDER. Geez,get a clue, will ya Unless there is proof that women get paid less for the same position and with the same amount of experience, the $11,000/yr. number is meaningless. It'd be like asking you if a guy was obese because his weight was 300#. Obviously, you could guess and have a 50/50 chance of being correct, but you wouldn't know unless you knew how tall the guy was and who the guy was. Lou Ferrigno is not obese and he was up to 300#. What proof are you looking for? Been to the courthouse lately? Haven't been to a courthouse since May, though I'm not sure what the fuck that has to do with anything. I'd like to see a direct comparison of the salaries according to position. If you compare a female secretary's salary to a male CFO's salary, you could come to the conclusion that she is underpaid. But, if you take into account that they aren't the same position, it doesn't point to any conclusion about gender pay discrepancy. First of all, I hope that dump you're taking comes out soon, because you look uncomfortable. Now, if you are unfamiliar with the concept of gender discrimination in the workplace, I suggest you do return to your local courthouse. Even better, do some research right from your toilet - er, desktop.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 7:33:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? And why did Mittens have a higher percentage of female staffers than any SITTING Dem governor. AND THIS WHOLE THING WOULD NOT HAVE COME UP, YOU OLD FOOL, IF THE WORD PORTFOLIO HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED FOR BINDER. Geez,get a clue, will ya Unless there is proof that women get paid less for the same position and with the same amount of experience, the $11,000/yr. number is meaningless. It'd be like asking you if a guy was obese because his weight was 300#. Obviously, you could guess and have a 50/50 chance of being correct, but you wouldn't know unless you knew how tall the guy was and who the guy was. Lou Ferrigno is not obese and he was up to 300#. What proof are you looking for? Been to the courthouse lately? Haven't been to a courthouse since May, though I'm not sure what the fuck that has to do with anything. I'd like to see a direct comparison of the salaries according to position. If you compare a female secretary's salary to a male CFO's salary, you could come to the conclusion that she is underpaid. But, if you take into account that they aren't the same position, it doesn't point to any conclusion about gender pay discrepancy. First of all, I hope that dump you're taking comes out soon, because you look uncomfortable. Now, if you are unfamiliar with the concept of gender discrimination in the workplace, I suggest you do return to your local courthouse. Even better, do some research right from your toilet - er, desktop. Wow, what a scathing rebuttal! Commenting on my profile picture! I did not say there isn't gender discrimination in the workplace. I was refuting the argument that Obama is violating Lilly Ledbetter by paying the women in his staff an average of $11,000 less than the average male. The stats were compiled by taking the amount paid to women divided by the number of women... and then done the same with the men. That has nothing to do with what position the women are in compared to the men. As anti-Obama as I am, I still prefer truths over half-truths. I do believe there is enough to knock him on without having to make something out of nothing.

DomKen -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 8:13:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? WH staff are paid according to their job classification. So it simply is not true that women are paid less than men for the same work in the WH. I think it is being insinuated that on balance, the women hold lower grade positions, but thanks for playing. Then they aren't doing the same work are they?

Baroana -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 8:22:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Fargle old buddy, how come female WH staffers average $11,00/yr less than their male counterparts? WH staff are paid according to their job classification. So it simply is not true that women are paid less than men for the same work in the WH. I think it is being insinuated that on balance, the women hold lower grade positions, but thanks for playing. Then they aren't doing the same work are they? Depends. For example, I work for an insurance company where every employee has a numeric "level." We might be paid at different levels even though in reality we do the same work. I hear complaints about it all the time.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 10:52:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mastercreeker Gee that is really funny.....as a male, my name was also in a couple of binders, heading resumes. Thank God for those binders, because in two different cases, whoever they were brought to decided to hire me. Another O bama campaign distraction......though the Clinton pic was great..... I miss the guy!!!!!! You saying you were on Mitt's "sugar list"? TMI Dude.

FMRFGOPGAL -> RE: Binders full of women (10/20/2012 10:53:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana Depends. For example, I work for an insurance company where every employee has a numeric "level." We might be paid at different levels even though in reality we do the same work. I hear complaints about it all the time. Waves to Baroana!

Baroana -> RE: Binders full of women (10/21/2012 9:25:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FMRFGOPGAL quote: ORIGINAL: Baroana Depends. For example, I work for an insurance company where every employee has a numeric "level." We might be paid at different levels even though in reality we do the same work. I hear complaints about it all the time. Waves to Baroana! [sm=waves.gif]

erieangel -> RE: Binders full of women (10/21/2012 11:52:34 AM)
I think everybody needs to do a little bit of research on what the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act does. Despite popular opinion, LLFPA does not guarantee equal pay for equal work. In fact, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supposed to accomplish that feat. However, the 1964 CRA has a clause in it that essentially bars anybody from suing an employer for equal pay after 180 days of start of employment. Lilly Ledbetter was months from retirement and had worked for Goodyear for several years when she discovered she'd been paid less the entire time of employment with that company than the men who held the same position. She took her case all the way to the Supreme Court where a 5-4 decision landed in favor of Goodyear. The LLFPA erases the 180 day line...or rather resets it with each paycheck. Which means that anybody who discovers at any time that they are being less than somebody with whom they work, and they are doing the same job, the person being less has that open window to file suit. Many businesses have rules about discussing pay with other employers and they are now being even more tightly enforced. Other businesses have the "numeric levels" baroana mentioned. The non-profit I work for does. Pay scales are determined by level of education, job title and experience in the mental health field. (I am a peer specialist but I earn more than some of the newly hired case managers because they are just out of college.) The next step will be to have a law supporting paycheck fairness. Gone will be the idea of gender inequality in the workplace. The Paycheck Fairness Act failed in the republican controlled House.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875