"Caitlyn Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let me give an example. About a year and a half ago, when I was with
> Interpath, there was a programmer who I was pretty friendly with. He is
> intelligent, talented, and certainly treated the women there with respect.
> I was shocked when he argued that women should receive lower pay than men
> for the same job. His attitude was that we were more likely to go off and
> have babies, while men are much more focused on their careers and likely to
> stay on the job, and therefore employers should invest more in men.
Hi, Caity!
It seems to me that, by the pricing structure for individual
consultants, at least, women should be paid *more*, not less, because
their employment less steady. That would be the case if a woman were
able to have a professional/managerial position, then take maternity
leave, and return to the job market in (at least) a position of
equivalent pay and responsibility. It sounds like an ideal case, and
I'm not sure how often it would work in practice. I suppose that,
coming off an extended leave, anyone who is able to persuade a
potential employer to hire them, ought to be able to persuade that
same employer that she should receive more money as compensation
because of the time she was not being paid.
Or does that sound too theoretical and MBA-ish?
Bob
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
