|
Mornacale posted:I'm pretty sure that if a company starts raising its salaries for men and not for women, and all this data is public, it's not going to go well. I certainly don't think that something like this is going to eliminate pay discrimination--only the destruction of systems of oppression in general will do that--but I don't think that it would somehow help white men and leave everyone else behind. Main Paineframe posted:
Seriously? Blatant wage discrimination against women across the board as he's describing is illegal and a great way to get sued. It also doesn't account for a large part of the wage gap, but that's a separate issue. edit: It would make discrimination lawsuits a lot easier as the burden of proof is largely on the employees right now. Xandu fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Apr 18, 2014 |
# ¿ Apr 18, 2014 20:48 |
|
|
# ¿ May 22, 2024 06:17 |
|
If you have no experience, no marketing skills and no one is hiring, how would you get a job even if you aren't competing against people with large networks?
|
# ¿ Apr 19, 2014 17:00 |
|
mugrim posted:You're literally advocating to just be fine with racism in the employment force and advocating against mechanisms that could easily move to establish more equality. Why would pay transparency affect nepotism and racism? I don't think that's been proven in this thread.
|
# ¿ Apr 19, 2014 18:09 |
|
rscott posted:Criminal records aren't fully available to the public except in certain cases like child support, driving related offenses and sex offenses but employers already require employees to submit to background checks and to disclose their criminal records, I guess I should retract my previous statement somewhat. That's not true, and you can perform a criminal background check on someone without their consent. The consent for background checks is more for education and previous employment.
|
# ¿ Apr 21, 2014 04:04 |