3 ms·
Rather 90% or 95% of the effect is probably not due to discrimination. Not 100% of the phenomenon is explained by working less. Be honest.
by fullsend 4y ago
Rather 90% or 95% of the effect is probably not due to discrimination. Not 100% of the phenomenon is explained by working less. Be honest.
- esyir 4y agoIt is. If the effect is largely not because of discrimination, and discrimination is far more often stated as the cause, I know who I'd be calling dishonest here. This goes double for anything directed at the public, since a short soundbite is all you get.
- tw98521358 4y agoYeah but the order 5% is likely outlier men (boomers) that earn disproportionately larger salaries and are slowly dropping out of the data set. The next group replacing them will have better gender distribution, it just takes time for the effect to flow through