The Student Room Group

The finance sector is sexist!!!! Attention

Scroll to see replies

you also have to consider the fact that comapanies may be less likely to employ women due to the fact they're probably going to have a baby, go on maternity leave etc etc thus increase costs for the business, whereas males dont have babies and although they might go on maternity/paternity leave, they are far less likely to and thus more realiable
Reply 101
I am glad you finally realise wage discrimination does exist in 21st century.


Original post by ComputerMaths97
I agree it's ridiculous, but you continue to listen to statistics that are formed by doing this.

There exists nobody that is paid less for the same job. If there is, you must report it to an authority because it's illegal, so can you please do that thanks.
Reply 102
Whenever we mention wage discrimination does exist in the current world, they always bring in ' it is illegal, please report it, there is no sign it exists but please can you report it?' They don't want to believe the facts so there is no ways we can help them jerks.

Original post by J-SP
We are not talking about chance here (e.g. coin tossing), we are talking about society.

The wage gap reporting is not based on people disclosing their salaries and therefore at a risk of them making it up. It is based on pay roll data from individual companies, so would be pretty accurate.

It is designed to look at like-for-like jobs within organisations and to see if there are trends to suggest there are wage discrepancies. It would factor in things you have suggested (like holiday/maternity and paternity leave/contracted working hours) to identify where there are wage discrepancies.
Reply 103
Yes that is true, indirectly cause pregnant ladies to only be able to seek part-time jobs, and get paid lesser!

Original post by Rainbowcorn
you also have to consider the fact that comapanies may be less likely to employ women due to the fact they're probably going to have a baby, go on maternity leave etc etc thus increase costs for the business, whereas males dont have babies and although they might go on maternity/paternity leave, they are far less likely to and thus more realiable
Original post by KRin
Maybe in organisations where cultural sensitivity and experience was very important, but in those cases the persons background will directly affect their job performance so its still down to suitability for the job. I'm talking about situations where a persons gender/race/orientation would have no specific advantages. Eg. If a software engineering company has a majority of male workers and they are looking to employ someone, should they hire a woman even if she was less qualified, just to make a diversity quota?


Well:
1) Client representation
2) Cultural assimilation for foreign markets
3) Diversity of thought/mitigation of group think; if everyone had the same cookie cutter background growing up they'd think in similar ways
etc.
etc.
etc..


You seem to equate female with being less qualified? Competition is still present to get into your so called 'quota' bracket, the implication that because someone is female they are therefore less qualified is false. It's no different to two dudes being presented on paper with the exact same qualifications and experience, but one happens to have done something out with their job suitability (e.g. they visited the office to meet up with their potential interviewers
), that tips the scale - they're both equally qualified but luck played in the other dude's fate.

Girls can be equally qualified but have the slight glimmer of luck involved in being underrepresented.



Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Quiton
Yes that is true, indirectly cause pregnant ladies to only be able to seek part-time jobs, and get paid lesser!


truee
Original post by J-SP
We are not talking about chance here (e.g. coin tossing), we are talking about society.

The wage gap reporting is not based on people disclosing their salaries and therefore at a risk of them making it up. It is based on pay roll data from individual companies, so would be pretty accurate.

It is designed to look at like-for-like jobs within organisations and to see if there are trends to suggest there are wage discrepancies. It would factor in things you have suggested (like holiday/maternity and paternity leave/contracted working hours) to identify where there are wage discrepancies.


They should. But they don't (referring to your last paragraph)

Look at the actual studies. Their either suggest a much smaller discrepancy or they ignore many important factors.

Look I wouldn't deny someone as ridiculous as this if it were true, but I am also very speculative when I see such an absurd statistic. I really researched it, and you have to look at the data used by the studies that conclude that there's a wage gap. They just simply ignore too many factors, purely because it would take too long to consider it all I imagine. It's much easier to take an average and conclude you need more money than it is to do some research to conclude by saying "yes we were all right there's no wage gap" - that seems a waste of time to me.
Original post by J-SP
Although shared paternity leave now means that isn't exclusive to women at all.


thats true, however, men are still less likely to use paternity leave or if they do, usually not for a long term (obviously with exceptions) as it is women who carry a baby for 9 months and then might breast feed etc. This still means men are far less likely to be away for a long time thus the 'safer' option if you will
Original post by Quiton
Whenever we mention wage discrimination does exist in the current world, they always bring in ' it is illegal, please report it, there is no sign it exists but please can you report it?' They don't want to believe the facts so there is no ways we can help them jerks.


You have got to be the most deluded person on this forum.

I do hope you're on tumblr, makes it much easier when everyone with this high level of ignorance is on the same platform, makes it easier to ignore them when they're grouped up.
Reply 109
You are not confident that you can form logical and sound arguments to defend wage gap never exist that is why you resort to personal attacks. All the best with you asking your mother to teach you social etiquette.


and
Original post by ComputerMaths97
You have got to be the most deluded person on this forum.

I do hope you're on tumblr, makes it much easier when everyone with this high level of ignorance is on the same platform, makes it easier to ignore them when they're grouped up.
Reply 110
Original post by Princepieman
Well:
1) Client representation
2) Cultural assimilation for foreign markets
3) Diversity of thought/mitigation of group think; if everyone had the same cookie cutter background growing up they'd think in similar ways
etc.
etc.
etc..


You seem to equate female with being less qualified? Competition is still present to get into your so called 'quota' bracket, the implication that because someone is female they are therefore less qualified is false. It's no different to two dudes being presented on paper with the exact same qualifications and experience, but one happens to have done something out with their job suitability (e.g. they visited the office to meet up with their potential interviewers
), that tips the scale - they're both equally qualified but luck played in the other dude's fate.

Girls can be equally qualified but have the slight glimmer of luck involved in being underrepresented.



Posted from TSR Mobile


Of course I don't think women are less qualified, its just an example. I am a women and in my year I'm the only girl doing computing, I also got the highest marks for AS level last year. I think your misunderstanding what I'm saying cause I agree with a lot of the points you make here, so I'll try to be more clear.

In some jobs having a mix of different types of people allows the job to be done better.
However, in my opinion hiring certain people just to fill a diversity quota is going to result is less qualified people getting jobs they wouldn't have otherwise been able to get. And that's not fair.
If I get hired by a software engineering company I want it to be because I was the best and most skilled applicant, not because the company wanted to look good an paper.

In your example of the twos guys being presented on paper with the exact same qualifications and experience, the guy who visited the office displayed dedication and enthusiasm, which are desirable job traits, making him better suited to the job. So he would get hired.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Elivercury
I have seen nothing requiring companies to legally have a quota for diversity?

Regardless, this is a separate topic, the route does not necessarily need to be related to quotas.

Lets go the whole hog and say they make a scheme for women, muslims, LGBT, minorities, jews...any others? We're at 5 at the moment. Assuming 1% of their hires come through this process that is a whopping 5% of their staff are hired through this route...while they will still continue to hire 70-80% white men via their normal routes. I'm really not seeing the problem, and I say this as a white man.

I am perfectly confident in my ability to succeed and get a job and do not need to feel threatened by what is ultimately a positive initiative.

Incidentally, I would be dead set against, say, a 40% quota as you will get people being hired for their gender rather than their ability. On the other hand, if you believe that the top 1% of 50% of the population are getting a "free ride" then that is rather ridiculous really.


Why would a diversity quota be at 1%? that's like hiring one more black person to look diverse.
If you don't believe there is a 40% quota on select Norway companies, then search it up.
Even the EU has made a gender quota of 40%, but not every country agrees in a way like the UK
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/12034462/Britain-seeks-to-halt-EU-gender-quota-plan.html
and
Glad that our confident in your ability :smile:
Hey guys. OP here
Everyone seems to be talking about the wage gap. Does it exist? Has it been debunked? etc etc
Now, when making reference to this 'wage gap', are we talking about the same job? Are we talking about a male doctor earning more than a female nurse, or a male doctor who out earns a female doctor? If referring to the latter, this could be caused to a multitude of factors, such as numbers of hour worked, specialty etc etc and it could be inferred causation that women earn less than men - a correlation exists yet the causation is simply not there

What do you guys think?
Can we get an Amen?
AMEN.
**but why why is she voting to leave the EU** *sob*
Yeah it's absurd, they hate the scientific method because it's "masculinist". These are the people holding governments and the media to ransom to support their idiocy.

btw don't compare schalisticism with feminism, feminism is much worse. Scholasticism did decent work with flawed Aristotelian logical system. Feminists don't use science or logic at all.

btw, are there actually scientists using the "feminist methodology"?
Original post by J-SP
I think its only small businesses that see it as an issue. Given how many organisations provide enhanced maternity leave packages, they clearly value women as much as they do men and actively pursue financial remuneration packages that mean they might recruit and retain women (and men) whether they have children or not.


yeah thats also very true, most bigger companies are 'well off' aka have good profit coming in, so it is the smaller companies which sometimes do this
Lol what if someone says that they are a transgender? Would they get in?
Original post by starwarsjedi123
Hi
i'm a male and feel quite offended. I have been browsing sites of many of the major finance companies, such as JP Morgan or PwC , and have seen a recurring trend. I am truly disgusted. I have seen many 'women in business' schemes which allow women to apply for less competitive internships, as males are unable to attend. I will not stop campaigning for equality in the workspace until i see some 'male in business schemes'

Honestly, i feel its quite despicable, that in the 21st century, i have been discriminated against. As a male i should be able to attend a 'male in business' internship.

rant over!


There's a reason for this you know, it's because the financial industry is dominated by men, about 70% or more workers are male.

In Engineering that figure is closer to 90%

What does this mean? There is a lack of women in these workplaces so employers want to balance it out and at least try to bring the ratio closer to 50-50

If that means giving women an "unfair advantage" then so be it, at the end of the day it's up to the employer to hire whomever they wish and it's up to us (the applicants) to make the most out of any situation.
Original post by Trapz99
Lol what if someone says that they are a transgender? Would they get in?


You'd be caught out with background checks

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Quiton
Both females and males are involved in the normal selection process. It is not that Pwc/JP only has schemes for females. There are different duties and roles that they have to commit during the internship, read what the schemes are about before screaming here that every female you met in your life get better pay/better educated than you do. And if this only happens to you, I am sure there is no reason you should turn your guns to female as a population, do some self-reflection, work hard and study hard.


It's not personal, in fact in my life the boys I know - after some initial wobbles - have generally done better than the girls, they have more resilience and drive.

This is statistics.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending