Teresa Mosqueda Proposes Gender Pay Gap Policies, Including Ban on Asking About Salary History


Got to admit, if you'd quizzed me on the pay ratio for women of color versus white men, I would not have guessed as low as 50%. Now I know.
The only way to really close the pay gap is to have huge (bracketed)taxes on income. i.e. Any income in excess of $10million/year should be taxed at 90% or higher.
Gotta catch up to Grant's policies, I guess.
I fully support the ban on salary histories. Pay me for the position, not undercut me just because I got a crap salary at my previous job.

The flip side works too. It's easy to reject hires because their salary history says they made more at their previous gig, even though they may be willing to take a cut for your job. But it never even gets to the point of making an offer because you don't think they'll take it, or they'll be insulted and have a negative opinion of the company.
Always with the false equivalence.

The gender pay gap straight across almost every profession is nil.

The pay gap Mosqueda and other assholes like her are always citing is a lifelong, non career discerning pay gap.

Which means it's referring to a blatant ignorance of things like time off for child rearing. That the difference in wages doesn't take into consideration the difference in JOBS!!! (Derp!) The fact that men do significantly more dangerous and physically demanding jobs. The fact that women start businesses that are smaller in scope and less steady in operation.

Knock it the fuck off people. We know you're full of shit.

If you want to make the same money for doing less, safer, and less physical work...say that. But stop pretending that wage discrimination is a thing that needs addressing.
I'd be careful about comparing races as the core disparities can be better explained by other factors such as quality schools, access to community services, community involvement, etc. Yes, there is racism and it's more prevalent in some fields, but as you get into the higher paying fields it plays less.

However for women, even tech can be a minefield. Trying to be heard in a room full of high achieving males from top schools is hard enough for a man. For a woman you risk coming across as bitchy or demonstrative whereas a man is just being assertive. Gender and communication studies have shown that even a minority of men will dominate discussion time relative to female colleagues.
I don't really think it matters that the pay gaps frequently sited are live long and not job-for-job. Unless you think job-for-job pay discrimination NEVER exists, there should be a good process for people who experience it, staffed and resourced for correctly.

Banning pay history questions is likely to be less effective than people imagine. Employers will still ask for your "salary requirements" as an open ended question, and most people will still ask for a percent raise on their old job--that's how were work. It feels insane to ask for a 50% raise. The policy strikes me as difficult to enforce, needlessly onerous, and of limited utility.

It's probably more productive to hire someone to teach people to negotiate in job interviews than to handle a case load where there average investigation take almost an entire year. Solve a handful of complaints a year? Or teach 15 people negotiation and interview skills every hour?
Oh yeah I forgot,

Often recruiters want to know your salary history because they want to make sure you're in the right ballpark. When I knew I was being under payed at Google, I'd be asked "How much are you making at Google." I'd respond, "I'm looking for roles in a $___ to $___ range." And I was never asked to clarify my actual Google rate.

If you're interviewing with a company, pick a range where the amount you actually want is right in the middle. If you're interviewing with an agency, set the lower number $2 below then number you really want, i.e. a $60 - $ 70/hr range will get you offered $65 by a company and $62 by an agency.

Oh and another good response to, "How much did you make at X job?" is "Other recruiters have quoted me $___/hr for similar roles, but I'm looking for {insert some feel good thing like "a company that really understands customer obsession"}.
I suspect the ban on asking salary histories will only make things worse for a vast majority of people, men and women.
If only we could tap the energy generated by whining we would never have to burn another molecule of carbon again.
The gap disappears when comparing similar educational and experience levels.
Plus women get more education these days.
But The Left never lets the facts get in the way of an awesome narrative.

Pay Gap!

Hands Up!! Don't Shoot!!!

oh the injustice
Unless it's criminal, what Right does the City have in intervening in a job interview.

By What Right?
If it were true that employers who hired women of color could pay them all 50% less than white men, then if I were an employer, I would have the most "diverse" work force in all the land, since it would save me 50% in labor costs. All of the local restaurants who are complaining about the minimum wage could fire all the white dudes and hire women of color and only have to pay them $7.50 an hour! What a great idea!
Please correct me if I am wrong about this, but is not the point of using "Latinx" to include both Latino and Latina individuals, in a context where we could be discussing either/both? Does "Latinx women" make any sense?
Why are so many people siding with companies on this topic? We're not supposed to share our salaries with co-workers, so why are we expected to share them with respective employers? I'm not getting a loan from them; I'm getting a job.

They should offer a wage that works with their budget, and I should determine whether that wage is acceptable; if it isn't, I'll counter-offer or walk away. Why should they be given the negotiating advantage of knowing my previous salaries? It is literally the primary driver of lower salaries for women and minorities; they start lower, and never catch up because their incremental improvements mirror those people who started 20-50% higher. I can't even figure out a downside for employees.
@13 you could reduce your costs even further by hiring white people from the Dakotas and Wyoming and such, where even WA minimum wage is a living wage.
By What Right?

You might want to try learning the first thing about labor law before you comment on articles concerning proposed changes to one.

Just saying.