Senate Republicans block pay equity bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Protein

Banned
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/senate-pay-equity-bill-110980.html

Senate Republicans rejected a measure written by Senate Democrats aimed at bridging differences in pay between men and women.

The Paycheck Fairness Act fell short 52-40, failing to clear a 60-vote procedural vote hurdle on Monday evening, the third time the measure has failed since spring of 2012.


That might be the last vote this year on Democrats’ poll-driven, election-year legislation aimed at creating a national contrast between Democrats and Republicans, aides said, given this is likely the last week the Senate is in session before recessing for the midterms.

Democrats say the Paycheck Fairness Act would make significant headway to narrowing gender pay disparities by offering training for salary negotiations, increasing employees’ legal options for fighting pay disparities and prohibiting retaliation against employees seeking salary information.

Party leaders panned Republicans for again rejecting the proposal.
“Democrats offered Republicans a chance to right their wrong in blocking pay equity earlier this year but rather than reversing course, Republicans doubled down, ” said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Senate Democrat. “Republicans have once again told women across the country that they don’t deserve a fair shot at earning equal pay for equal work.”

Republicans have deemed the bill too broad and likely to result in a rise in litigation — and criticized Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) for holding votes on legislation that has already failed this year.

“Here we have an international crisis, with the defense authorization bill out there, and we refuse to take it up,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). “We continue to take up issues that he thinks may help them in November. And we’ve got the world in turmoil.”

The issue of gender pay equity is playing a significant role on the campaign trail ahead of the November elections as Democrats seek to boost enthusiasm among women voters. Democratic incumbents and candidates in competitive states are highlighting their support for the bill and GOP opposition to it — a fact not lost on sitting Republican senators.

“It’s politics,” said Sen. Deb Fischer of Nebraska, one of four women Republicans in the Senate. “It’s a one-sided vote for political reasons, so [Democrats] can use it in campaigns.”

Democrats acknowledge the legislation is helpful in their battle to retain the Senate majority but insist their motivation is to pass legislation, not necessarily to attack Republicans.

“My goal is to have these issues be real and recognized by this country and voted on and passed,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, a member of Democratic leadership.
Republicans rejected even opening debate on the legislation in April, unanimously voting it down. But the contrast between the GOP and Democrats on the issue was dulled last week when 19 Senate Republicans voted to open debate on the measure, in part to eat up Senate floor time and disrupt planned votes on raising the minimum wage and responding to the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby contraception decision — initiatives that already failed this year.

With time running short for Congress to pass a government funding bill and approve President Barack Obama’s plan to arm Syrian rebels, Senate Democratic leaders may now decide to abandon revisiting those votes given incumbents’ desire to get back home and campaign. Both chambers of Congress are, for now, expecting to recess at the end of the week.
Click to expand...
 
My wife gets paid way less than her male counterparts. It's fucked up. She had to quit her job and finally got a new gig getting what she should be getting.
 
I don't understand the "Democrats only bring it up to score political points. So I won't cote for it!" thought process. Do they realize that the only way to stop the Democrats from scoring points for it is to vote for it? Voting against it is exactly what the Democrats want you to do.
 
"It's playing politics! They're doing it for popularity!"

As though doing things that generally benefit your populace and that they'll like is an offensive, wrong-minded concept to Republicans.
 
I'm a Democrat and absolutely think that women should make the same as their male counterparts, but I kind of understand what the Republicans are saying in this situation. There's a lot of gray areas here, and you can't legally mandate that men and women earn the same for the same job because no one in corporate environments gets paid the same for the same job. I understand that studies have shown that the exact same resume with a male name will get a higher starting offer than that resume with a female name, but that just tells me that this is a systemic issue. What does legislation look like that corrects this?

It seems like these bills keep getting pushed because Republicans will vote it down and then look bad.
 
I love how republicans always act like this isn't a big problem. That women getting paid less than men for the same work isn't a big issue.
 
Afrodium said:
I'm a Democrat and absolutely think that women should make the same as their male counterparts, but I kind of understand what the Republicans are saying in this situation. There's a lot of gray areas here, and you can't legally mandate that men and women earn the same for the same job because no one in corporate environments gets paid the same for the same job. I understand that studies have shown that the exact same resume with a male name will get a higher starting offer than that resume with a female name, but that just tells me that this is a systemic issue. What does legislation look like that corrects this?
Click to expand...

It is a tricky issue. If two people (irrespective of gender) do the same job but the second is better at negotiating, should the employer have to go back to the first employee and offer them a raise (or increase in benefits) to match the latter's receipt as a result of their bargaining ability. I don't doubt there's a problem, but I'm not sure regulation is an actual solution.
 
I'd need to read the bill but the Republicans do have a point - this sounds like there could be huge gray areas to this kind of plan. I'm all for equal pay, but there's a good chance this was a very vague bill since we don't know much about its inner workings.
 
American politics is just a dog and pony show in general, but Republicans take it to the extreme. I don't know whether it's a realization that within a few years their party will have fractured and died or just pure arrogance and ignorance that drives them to act so childish.
 
Afrodium said:
I'm a Democrat and absolutely think that women should make the same as their male counterparts, but I kind of understand what the Republicans are saying in this situation. There's a lot of gray areas here, and you can't legally mandate that men and women earn the same for the same job because no one in corporate environments gets paid the same for the same job. I understand that studies have shown that the exact same resume with a male name will get a higher starting offer than that resume with a female name, but that just tells me that this is a systemic issue. What does legislation look like that corrects this?

It seems like these bills keep getting pushed because Republicans will vote it down and then look bad.
Click to expand...

This might be one way to look at it, however, the southern USA blocking the equal rights amendment for the past 90 years tells me otherwise.
 
Republicans might have a point in the vagueness of the bill if that is true but the "we have an international crisis!" Reason is bullshit.
 
davepoobond said:
Republicans might have a point in the vagueness of the bill if that is true but the "we have an international crisis!" Reason is bullshit.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they're countering the 'this is for political points!' with 'But we should be focusing on these political points!'

Only thing is, unequal pay is a well documented, proven reality that needs to be addressed. If the bill really is ambiguously written, then they should come out and counter with what they believe to be one which is written better. Of course, they won't.
 
“Here we have an international crisis, with the defense authorization bill out there, and we refuse to take it up,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). “We continue to take up issues that he thinks may help them in November. And we’ve got the world in turmoil.”
Click to expand...

Translation: "We can't possibly discuss or vote on this issue because I am a sad, senile old man who is fucking obsessed with getting us involved militarily in every single skirmish on the planet."
 
Afrodium said:
I'm a Democrat and absolutely think that women should make the same as their male counterparts, but I kind of understand what the Republicans are saying in this situation. There's a lot of gray areas here, and you can't legally mandate that men and women earn the same for the same job because no one in corporate environments gets paid the same for the same job. I understand that studies have shown that the exact same resume with a male name will get a higher starting offer than that resume with a female name, but that just tells me that this is a systemic issue. What does legislation look like that corrects this?

It seems like these bills keep getting pushed because Republicans will vote it down and then look bad.
Click to expand...

Agreed completely.
 
"This isn't important and we don't want democrats to be right and have any good ammo. Look at these keys jingly jingly jingly jingly jingly"
 
Earthstrike said:
This might be one way to look at it, however, the southern USA blocking the equal rights amendment for the past 90 years tells me otherwise.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to deny that this is related to sexism. I'm sure misogyny is where some of these votes are coming from. However, it's a nuanced situation, and I don't think that this is lost on the Democrats. I have a feeling that bills like this are never intended to pass, their only goal is to get voted down by Republicans to generate headlines that make them look like woman-haters (even if many of them are).
 
^ The wording in the bill would at least go a ways to giving women the tools to brisge the gap themselves in a technical standpoint. Practically though, I think they're gonna have to wait for more of the boy's club mentality CEOs to die off before they'll get real strides to equality. I'm saying, it wasn't a bill just designed to fail. If it had passed it actually would have helped.

LabouredSubterfuge said:
"It's playing politics! They're doing it for popularity!"

As though doing things that generally benefit your populace and that they'll like is an offensive, wrong-minded concept to Republicans.
Click to expand...

And it's not like they're forcing Republicans into anything. It's more of a "Just in case you thought about voting Republican, this is what they think of women" vote. And the House Republicans demonstrated it quite aptly.
 
Not sure how I feel. The bill doesn't really sound like it would do anything except waste people's time, but since this is where the reform would likely start I kinda wish it would have passed.
 
Fox318 said:
Reid had a chance to reform filibuster rules and he did nothing.
Click to expand...

That's not true. There was filibuster reform when it came to confirming nominees (remember when repubs went nuts over Reid "going nuclear"?, but he didn't go far enough. I'm not Reid's cheerleader, but to say he did nothing is just untrue.

Haloid1177 said:
Not sure how I feel. The bill doesn't really sound like it would do anything except waste people's time, but since this is where the reform would likely start I kinda wish it would have passed.
Click to expand...

This seems helpful:

increasing employees’ legal options for fighting pay disparities
Click to expand...

Though I admit I'm not versed in what it would add or what tools women have for fighting pay inequality right now.
 
Volimar said:
That's not true. There was filibuster reform when it came to confirming nominees (remember when repubs went nuts over Reid "going nuclear"?, but he didn't go far enough. I'm not Reid's cheerleader, but to say he did nothing is just untrue.
Click to expand...

Though it is also important to be clear that in that instance the man had quite literally no other option.
 
Wilsongt said:
It was brought to the floor as pure symbolism. Dems knew they would block it. Just more fuel for attack ads.
Click to expand...

They should be attacked for it. They should be attacked until eight of them buckle under the shame and vote for the bill. Then it won't be pure symbolism. Then it will be a law based in fairness.
 
Afrodium said:
I'm a Democrat and absolutely think that women should make the same as their male counterparts, but I kind of understand what the Republicans are saying in this situation. There's a lot of gray areas here, and you can't legally mandate that men and women earn the same for the same job because no one in corporate environments gets paid the same for the same job. I understand that studies have shown that the exact same resume with a male name will get a higher starting offer than that resume with a female name, but that just tells me that this is a systemic issue. What does legislation look like that corrects this?

It seems like these bills keep getting pushed because Republicans will vote it down and then look bad.
Click to expand...

Systemic issues require legislation. Keeping it at status quo, will just keep things at status quo. There is no driving force or reason to fix the pay equality gap. It isn't happening at an acceptable pace on its own.

The way you fix this is you force companies to try and equalize pay.
 
“It’s politics,” said Sen. Deb Fischer of Nebraska, one of four women Republicans in the Senate. “It’s a one-sided vote for political reasons, so [Democrats] can use it in campaigns.”
Click to expand...

I hope Hilary uses this to nail whatever paper tiger you throw against her right to the wall.
 
Why can't the GOP write some equal pay legislation? That way the issue dies so the Dems won't be able to throw it in their face, and the GOP passes something so they look good.

What are GOP supporters gonna do? Start voting democrat? They may even get some of the woman vote. Where's the downside?
 
Dr.Acula said:
Why can't the GOP write some equal pay legislation? That way the issue dies so the Dems won't be able to throw it in their face, and the GOP passes something so they look good.

What are GOP supporters gonna do? Start voting democrat? They may even get some of the woman vote. Where's the downside?
Click to expand...

Donors would be none too pleased.
 
Dr.Acula said:
Why can't the GOP write some equal pay legislation? That way the issue dies so the Dems won't be able to throw it in their face, and the GOP passes something so they look good.

What are GOP supporters gonna do? Start voting democrat? They may even get some of the woman vote. Where's the downside?
Click to expand...
What are you, some kind of feminist socialist?
 
Jobiensis said:
Systemic issues require legislation. Keeping it at status quo, will just keep things at status quo. There is no driving force or reason to fix the pay equality gap. It isn't happening at an acceptable pace on its own.

The way you fix this is you force companies to try and equalize pay.
Click to expand...

The issue is that pay isn't equalized for anyone. Let's say a corporation has an opening for a system's analyst position that will pay in the salary range of $55,000 - $59,000. The salary within that range that en employee falls into will depend on experience. As I said earlier, studies have shown that the same exact resume with a male name and a female name will be submitted for a position and the male will be given a higher offer. This is a problem, but this scenario will never happen in reality. A corporation will always be able to argue that the male's experience entitled him to a higher salary. The only way that men and women could be guaranteed equal pay would be if pay was equal to everyone, and all positions had a definitive salary, which is an unrealistic solution.

Additionally, the statistic that women make 75 cents on the dollar comes from the average female salaries versus the average of male salaries. The careers of the sampled men and women are not taken into account. Getting females into the currently male dominated STEM fields would actually close the gender pay gap in a way that legislation can't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Kill Bill: Volume 3 Apparently Appending
26
1K
Brigandier replied
Bill Burr and Billy Corgan Family Reunion Gone Wrong
33
3K
simpatico replied
Harry Potter actress opens OnlyFans account to pay off debts
Drama  2
97
7K
Donald mac Ronald replied
'X' changing how block function works - blocked users will be able to see your posts but not engage with them
43
2K
EverydayBeast replied
Apple ordered to pay Ireland €13bn in Taxes
2
52
4K
Trilobit replied
Top Bottom