Oftentimes many will cite an alleged "pay gap" between men and women. Despite this notion having been refuted time and again, it is still proffered in time for elections as a way of spurning the female side of the electorate into voting for Democrats.
And typically Democrats will say they are for "equal pay for equal work". And as great as such a notion sounds, there is one big problem: what is "equal work"?
Let me proffer two scenarios, and I’ll borrow on my own profession – software engineering – as the example.
First scenario
Jim and Alice are software engineers on the same team at the same company.
Jim is 32, has been writing software in his spare time and professionally for about half his life and has made available several of his projects online on the Internet. He is recognized for his expertise and readily shares it as well with his team where possible. He’s been working for the company for about 5 years, and continues to work on his own projects in his spare time.
Alice is 32 and has been working for the company since graduating from college. Like Jim she also has a computer science degree, but when hired, she had little experience beyond her classes and she makes no effort toward additional learning or study in her spare time.
Jim and Alice work on the same team and contribute to the same projects working toward the same goals and ends. For the sake of argument, we’ll say they work with the same programming language and frameworks and the same tools.
Should Jim and Alice be getting paid the same? Why or why not? If no, who should be getting paid more and why?
Second scenario
Jim and Alice are software engineers on the same team at the same company.
Alice is 32, has been writing software in her spare time and professionally for about half her life and has made available several of her projects online on the Internet. He is recognized for her expertise and readily shares it as well with her team where possible. She’s been working for the company for about 5 years, and continues to work on her own projects in her spare time.
Jim is 32 and has been working for the company since graduating from college. Like Alice he also has a computer science degree, but when hired, he had little experience beyond his classes and he makes no effort toward additional learning or study in his spare time.
Jim and Alice work on the same team and contribute to the same projects working toward the same goals and ends. For the sake of argument, we’ll say they work with the same programming language and frameworks and the same tools.
Should Jim and Alice be getting paid the same? Why or why not? If no, who should be getting paid more and why?
My take
Okay this is almost a trick scenario. If you haven’t noticed, the scenarios are near mirror images of each other. In the first Jim is the far more experienced and more passionate engineer, while in the second it is Alice who is more experienced and more passionate.
The question comes down to this: should Jim and Alice be paid the same? And if you say that in the first scenario Alice should be paid the same as Jim while in the second there should be the disparity, you’ve got a lot of explaining to do.
But then it’s immaterial whether you think they should be paid the same or not. Few companies would dream of doing so for two reasons. First, it would be categorically unfair to pay a far less experienced, less passionate engineer the same as the greater experienced, more passionate colleague. Second, if it were discovered this was occurring, it wouldn’t last long as the company would risk losing the far more valuable engineer as he or she sought out a company willing to pay more.
Yet in the "equal pay for equal work" crowds, experience and expertise are often overlooked.
Further, the idea of "equal work" is a myth. Two people will not do the same job the same way. That is just reality. Even two people with similar levels of expertise and experience will differ on attitude, energy, and/or perception.
This is why individuals are paid based on the kind of value they can bring. Those who demonstrate themselves to be more valuable – such as by reducing costs and increasing efficiencies – will or should be paid more. And if the more valuable person happens to be a man, then so be it. If it’s a woman, so be that as well.
But if you’re going to advocate "equal pay for equal work", then you must first define "equal work". Until you can do that, anything you attempt to say advocating your position can be easily and readily ignored.
