The REAL war on women ?....In your face....

N

NOVA

U. S. NAVY Veteran
http://freebeacon.com/senate-dems-betray-lilly/

Of the five senators who participated in Wednesday’s press conference—Barbara Mikulski (D., Md.), Patty Murray (D., Wash.), Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.), Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) and Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.)—three pay their female staff members significantly less than male staffers.
Murray, who has repeatedly accused Republicans of waging a “war a women,” is one of the worst offenders. Female members of Murray’s staff made about $21,000 less per year than male staffers in 2011, a difference of 35.2 percent.

And now, get ready for the tapdancin' hypocrites......probably with a little "they do it too" jitterbug....
 
I see this story is making the rounds on the connie con sites. One thing that seems to be missing is data on seniority & staffer position/responsibilities. Which is kind of important.
 
You sure a hell ain't gonna see it on MSNBC

I just KNEW you'd have a new step in your dance routine.....moonwalkin' on toe shoes.....


Poor Onecell......keep on dancin'.....
 
bravo said:
I just KNEW you'd have a new step in your dance routine.....moonwalkin' on toe shoes.....


Poor Onecell......keep on dancin'.....
Click to expand...

In the average Congressional office, there is generally a top aide who makes in the 6 figure territory, and there are also clerical people who make in the teens.

Are you saying that someone's seniority & position in the office is inconsequential to the conclusion? If you have a male top aide making $120K, and a female clerical position making $17K...that won't skew the #'s?

Poor bravs. There are those issues w/ math again.
 
It's interesting; this story is really catching on fast. Fox is having their best day this week.

Do people think that all congressional staffers make the same salary?
 
Onceler said:
I see this story is making the rounds on the connie con sites. One thing that seems to be missing is data on seniority & staffer position/responsibilities. Which is kind of important.
Click to expand...

Interestingly enough it seems to be missing in the 70% figure that we hear about so often as well...
 
Damocles said:
Interestingly enough it seems to be missing in the 70% figure that we hear about so often as well...
Click to expand...


Well, to be fair, economy-wide there should be less differential between what men and women make than among a few dozen staffers in one particular Senate office.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Well, to be fair, economy-wide there should be less differential between what men and women make than among a few dozen staffers in one particular Senate office.
Click to expand...

It would depend. I suspect we'll see a trend in a different direction now that women outnumber men in colleges. Of course, it depends on what they are taking too. When I was in college we had zillions of dudes in Engineering with the rare woman. If that trend has changed we'll likely see a difference.

I've personally never worked for a place where they do not pay us by what we do, setting us in a "grade" that everybody participates in.

I've often wondered how they came up with the figure because of that. Do you think that Pelosi purposefully hired men into the higher paying jobs?
 
Onceler said:
What's to "dance" about, bravs? The fact that there are different salaries in Senate offices?
Click to expand...


Women don't need the big bucks anyway, right Onecell.....thats the Democrats way.....be a hypocrite because assholes don't care and will defend me....



Poor Onecell......must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..
 
Damocles said:
It would depend. I suspect we'll see a trend in a different direction now that women outnumber men in colleges. Of course, it depends on what they are taking too. When I was in college we had zillions of dudes in Engineering with the rare woman. If that trend has changed we'll likely see a difference.

I've personally never worked for a place where they do not pay us by what we do, setting us in a "grade" that everybody participates in.

I've often wondered how they came up with the figure because of that. Do you think that Pelosi purposefully hired men into the higher paying jobs?
Click to expand...


Well, who the hell knows how this outfit calculated the differential. I took a look at Senator Feinstein's disclosure just for giggles and you have three women (or traditionally female named individuals) that worked only a few days as staff assistants and made only a few hundred bucks. That's going to skew things downward severely.
 
bravo said:
Women don't need the big bucks anyway, right Onecell.....thats the Democrats way.....be a hypocrite because assholes don't care and will defend me....
Click to expand...

Who is being hypocritical?

Here's a quick primer, bravs - if you're going to compare salaries between men & women, it's generally best to compare the position & seniority level, as well. Because top aides generally make a lot more than people who file stuff. And that doesn't make the payscale discriminatory in any way, unless you want to start arguing that inexperienced people with fewer qualifications should make as much as their more experienced & qualified counterparts.
 
Onceler said:
I see this story is making the rounds on the connie con sites. One thing that seems to be missing is data on seniority & staffer position/responsibilities. Which is kind of important.
Click to expand...

Onceler said:
In the average Congressional office, there is generally a top aide who makes in the 6 figure territory, and there are also clerical people who make in the teens.

Are you saying that someone's seniority & position in the office is inconsequential to the conclusion? If you have a male top aide making $120K, and a female clerical position making $17K...that won't skew the #'s?

Poor bravs. There are those issues w/ math again.
Click to expand...

General Buck Turgidson said:
Well, who the hell knows how this outfit calculated the differential. I took a look at Senator Feinstein's disclosure just for giggles and you have three women (or traditionally female named individuals) that worked only a few days as staff assistants and made only a few hundred bucks. That's going to skew things downward severely.
Click to expand...

Onceler said:
Who is being hypocritical?

Here's a quick primer, bravs - if you're going to compare salaries between men & women, it's generally best to compare the position & seniority level, as well. Because top aides generally make a lot more than people who file stuff. And that doesn't make the payscale discriminatory in any way, unless you want to start arguing that inexperienced people with fewer qualifications should make as much as their more experienced & qualified counterparts.
Click to expand...



The Free Beacon used publicly available salary data from the transparency website Legistorm to calculate the figures, and considered only current full-time staff members who were employed for the entirety of fiscal year 2011.
 
bravo said:

The Free Beacon used publicly available salary data from the transparency website Legistorm to calculate the figures, and considered only current full-time staff members who were employed for the entirety of fiscal year 2011.
Click to expand...


LOL - so it's full-time staffers. Do you think all staffers make the same salary?

I'll break it down for you as simply as I can. Let's say I'm a new Senator, and they only give me budget for 2 employees - I can hire a senior aide for $80K, and a receptionist for $20K. If I hire a man for the former and a woman for the latter, the Free Beacon would then report a huge disparity between how much I pay both. Because there is.

Get it yet, dumbo?
 
bravo said:

The Free Beacon used publicly available salary data from the transparency website Legistorm to calculate the figures, and considered only current full-time staff members who were employed for the entirety of fiscal year 2011.
Click to expand...


Pro Tip: When someone publishes something like this and doesn't tell give you the information they used to reach their conclusions so that no one can replicate their work, there is a reason for that.
 
bravo said:
Women don't need the big bucks anyway, right Onecell.....thats the Democrats way.....be a hypocrite because assholes don't care and will defend me....



Poor Onecell......must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..must defend hypocrisy..
Click to expand...


So you truly believe that a staff gofer should be paid the same salary as the Senator's Chief of Staff?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top