3 ms·

i didn't read this, but i always wondered if women's salaries are lower on average because of a reluctance to negotiate. (thus citing that women's salaries are

i didn't read this, but i always wondered if women's salaries are lower on average because of a reluctance to negotiate. (thus citing that women's salaries are lower than men's has nothing to do with gender bias?) I'm not trying to say that discrimination is ok, I'm just saying that the typical system requires you to ask for money, you're not just given it out of the kindness of your employers heart.

sses 14y ago
Maybe that typical system has a gender bias then :) Perhaps if women are implicitly required to negotiate, and choose not to, then they will be recruited by another organization who is willing to pay them more without negotiation. You've just lost out on a good engineer - the employer has done themselves a disservice.
- christopherslee 14y ago
  i think both men and women are implicitly required to negotiate. i guess like other people are saying, i'm not sure if people look at two equal candidates and discriminate based on sex/age/other.
juridatenshi 14y ago
It might be a contributing factor, but I doubt it's the only thing going on. There was an interesting study recently showing a gender bias in academic science [1]. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109.abst...
crazygringo 14y ago
I recall (can't find them now) there are studies which basically explain away the entire wage-gap between men and women as two factors: 1) women negotiate less 2) women take more time off for children, thus advance more slowly Basically showing that there is no inherent gender discrimination on wages in the US, in the aggregate -- that it's entirely due to choices made by women, not any kind of discrimination whatsoever. On the other hand, there are also blind studies testing resumes in certain areas, which show that employers perceive resumes with male names to be stronger than identical resumes with female names. And on the other other hand, I feel like every engineering place I've worked would always hire an equally-qualified woman over a man, since there are so few of them to begin with. So, who knows...
- scarmig 14y ago
  "1) women negotiate less" Simply because it's a choice made by women doesn't mean that they're not being constrained by discrimination or sexist norms. Consider: what if the reason women choose not to negotiate is that the penalties for negotiation are higher for women? E.g., they'll be perceived as bitchy or ungrateful, while a man would lose nothing by negotiating or even gain character points for being assertive and proactive. Not providing evidence that that's the case, here (though to some extent it certainly is). But even free choice is constrained by the system it's embedded in.
- arrrg 14y ago
  How can this … “1) women negotiate less 2) women take more time off for children, thus advance more slowly” … not be due to inherent gender discrimination (mostly strict gender roles)? Those things explain gender discrimination, they certainly do not explain it away.
  - crazygringo 14y ago
    How could it? Well, it could be biological, for example. An awful lot of personality traits are affected by our biology. I'm not saying it necessarily is, but just that it's one theoretical way in which they might "not be due to inherent gender discrimination" or "strict gender roles". Suppose testosterone makes men more aggressive (and thus more likely to negotiate), and women have less of it -- then that's purely biological right there, no gender discrimination required.

sses 14y ago

Maybe that typical system has a gender bias then :) Perhaps if women are implicitly required to negotiate, and choose not to, then they will be recruited by another organization who is willing to pay them more without negotiation. You've just lost out on a good engineer - the employer has done themselves a disservice.

christopherslee 14y ago
i think both men and women are implicitly required to negotiate. i guess like other people are saying, i'm not sure if people look at two equal candidates and discriminate based on sex/age/other.

juridatenshi 14y ago

It might be a contributing factor, but I doubt it's the only thing going on. There was an interesting study recently showing a gender bias in academic science [1]. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109.abst...

crazygringo 14y ago

I recall (can't find them now) there are studies which basically explain away the entire wage-gap between men and women as two factors: 1) women negotiate less 2) women take more time off for children, thus advance more slowly Basically showing that there is no inherent gender discrimination on wages in the US, in the aggregate -- that it's entirely due to choices made by women, not any kind of discrimination whatsoever. On the other hand, there are also blind studies testing resumes in certain areas, which show that employers perceive resumes with male names to be stronger than identical resumes with female names. And on the other other hand, I feel like every engineering place I've worked would always hire an equally-qualified woman over a man, since there are so few of them to begin with. So, who knows...

scarmig 14y ago
"1) women negotiate less" Simply because it's a choice made by women doesn't mean that they're not being constrained by discrimination or sexist norms. Consider: what if the reason women choose not to negotiate is that the penalties for negotiation are higher for women? E.g., they'll be perceived as bitchy or ungrateful, while a man would lose nothing by negotiating or even gain character points for being assertive and proactive. Not providing evidence that that's the case, here (though to some extent it certainly is). But even free choice is constrained by the system it's embedded in.
arrrg 14y ago
How can this … “1) women negotiate less 2) women take more time off for children, thus advance more slowly” … not be due to inherent gender discrimination (mostly strict gender roles)? Those things explain gender discrimination, they certainly do not explain it away.
- crazygringo 14y ago
  How could it? Well, it could be biological, for example. An awful lot of personality traits are affected by our biology. I'm not saying it necessarily is, but just that it's one theoretical way in which they might "not be due to inherent gender discrimination" or "strict gender roles". Suppose testosterone makes men more aggressive (and thus more likely to negotiate), and women have less of it -- then that's purely biological right there, no gender discrimination required.