Working Women: US, Russia and Iran and a Side Note on Unemployment

The title of this piece is long and the thought for it comes from my radio listening. In the U.S. we are lucky to have a system of law, and for the most part a social acceptance, that allows women to do most any work they wish to do. Certainly there are some sticking points and we always are aware of this issue of compensation. (See my blog post from May 7th on Women's Issues) But I heard a radio show that made me think that most U.S. women should be glad they don't live in Russia. From the radio show PRI's The World reporter Jessica Golloher did a report on Jobs Women Can't Do in Russia. She reports "... the code lists 460 jobs off limits to women. Jobs like chimney sweep, fire fighter, blacksmith, steel worker, and metro train operator." Such a list in the U.S. would cause a major outrage and has in the past caused many a lawsuit followed by legislative action. However, in Russia the courts are not helpful. "One Russian woman recently tried to challenge the list. She filed a discrimination claim after being denied a job as a metro train operator. But this month Russian’s Supreme Court ruled against her."

And imagine the outrage over this quote from Evgenny Nasonov who is with the Kremlin-aligned Young Russian Foundation which promotes Russian family values. "I think there are several jobs and professions that women shouldn’t do for instance defend their country. Men should protect the homeland not women. Women should stay at home and take care of the children and the family." (This totally ignores the role women served in WWII in defending Russia, but who remembers that.) And then this quote from a young Russian woman "Russian women often want to appear weak. They like that men think that they are weak. Russian women don’t think about discrimination."

A second radio show talked about the current election in Iran and how some of the candidates are seeking more freedom for women. Women there just hope that at some point they can show their faces and hold jobs they have been trained for. One young woman hope that after the election she might get the engineering job she was hoping for.

All I can say is I am glad my wife and daughter have had, and will continue to have, the opportunity to pursue their career choices in the U.S.

Off the subject of women's issues, Clark Howard, of consumer advocacy fame, stated on his radio news report that a study just out shows that the unemployment figure of 9.4% does not truly reflect unemployment in the U.S. The study says that if you take into account the people who have quit looking and no longer report then the percentage of unemployed jumps to 16%. Times are tougher than they appear. A recovery will not come soon enough.

BTW, a side note. Setting off the company burgler alarm is a lousy way to start the day.

A Comparable Worth Discussion

Ann Bares, of Compensation Force, responded to a request from other HR pros and put on her blog a definition and discussion of the issue of comparable worth as presented in the current pay equity legislation. Take a look.

BTW, for all of you PHRs and SPHRs that will need to recertify this will probably be a future test question. So you may as well learn it now.

Bad News and Good News for Women in Human Resources

An article in the Wall Street Journal on Oct. 23rd talked about wage disparities. (Link requires subscription.) This is not unusual. The wage disparity between men and women is well documented and much discussed. The potential reasons are many: discrimination, career interruption, and predominately "female" careers among them. What makes this article noteable, however, is that Cari Tuna is writing about the field of Human Resources, where you would expect wages to be more equitable. And here is the bad news.

First an important fact. The majority of human resources professional are women. "About 70% of the country's 238,000 HR managers and 731,000 HR specialists are women, according to 2007 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics." So, you would expect in a field that is predominately female that wages for women would be ahead of men or at least on par. But, "...37 of the 50 highest-paid HR executives at Russell 3000 companies were men, according to a survey of 2007 proxy statements by Equilar, Inc., a California-based executive compensation research firm." And "The median weekly pay for male HR managers in 2007 was $1,581 – about 47% more than female managers took home. Among rank-and-file employees, men earned $1,037 per week, about 28% more than their female counterparts."

This is puzzling and there could be any number of reasons. A couple of new ones were suggested in the article, including who is tapped to fill HR exective positions, and the fact that many top HR positions are "combination" positions. A combination position is one such as VPHR and General Counsel. These apparently are staffed more often by men and who are thus paid more.

But so much for the bad news. Now the good news. Next year this is going turn around! If you are in human resources and you are female you have reason to CELEBRATE! With a Democrat controlled congress women in HR are going to benefit from the passage of three compensation acts designed to eliminate "historic discrimination". With the Paycheck Fairness Act, The Lily Ledbetter Act, and the Equal Pay Act women in human resources (and other professions) will get increases to put them on par with all the men in the profession. Pay disparites, for whatever reason, will be outlawed. Isn't that great news??? Plan the changes in your budgets now! This means that regardless of location, education, years in the job, and performance everyone in a single job title will be paid the same. It will certainly make compensation systems easier. Of course it might eliminate any incentive to try to get ahead. And the value of a degree and certification will potentially disappear. But who cares? Equality is a good thing.

So celebrate the good news! More money for everyone! Assuming the jobs still exist that is. Guess we will see.

Paycheck Fairness Act: Part II

As a follow up to my post yesterday here is a statement given to Congress by Camille Olson, an attorney with Seyfarth Shaw, LLC. Camille is a expert on women's pay issues. She gave this testimony on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce AGAINST the Paycheck Fairness Act. The arguments she makes are compelling, interesting and educational. I encourage you to spend some time on this. It will make you a BETTER HR professional.

Click on Camille Olson's testimony statement to read the pdf.