Thread: Obama Backs Equal Pay His Female Staffers Are PaidLess

Obama Backs Equal Pay for Women, Yet His Female Staffers Are Paid Less than Male Staffers
Fred Lucas
Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com) - While Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has vowed to make pay equity for women a top priority if elected president, an analysis of his Senate staff shows that women are outnumbered and out-paid by men.

That is in contrast to Republican presidential candidate John McCain's Senate office, where women, for the most part, out-rank and are paid more than men.

Obama spoke in Albuquerque, N.M. last week about his commitment to the issue and his support of a Senate bill to make it easier to sue an employer for pay discrimination.

"Mr. McCain is an honorable man, we respect his service. But when you look at our records and our plans on issues that matter to working women, the choice could not be clearer," Obama told the audience in New Mexico, a voter-swing state. "It starts with equal pay. Sixty-two percent of working women in America earn half or more than of their family's income. But women still earn 77 cents for every dollar earned by men in 2008. You'd think that Washington would be united it its determination to fight for equal pay."

He continued, saying that he is proud to have supported the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, which would extend the limit on how long an employee can wait before suing an employer for pay discrimination.

The legislation was named after Lilly Ledbetter, who was a supervisor at Goodyear Tire Rubber's plant in Gadsden, Ala. She sued for pay discrimination before retiring after 19 years because she had made $6,500 less per year than the lowest paid male supervisor.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out her case, saying she waited too long to file a complaint. The court said that under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, an employee must sue within 180 days of a decision regarding pay if alleged discrimination is involved. The bill sought to change the law, but Democrats could not muster the needed 60 votes to override a Republican filibuster.

Obama voted for the equal pay litigation bill in April. McCain was campaigning that day and did not vote. But he has expressed opposition to the legislation, fearing it would open the door to too much litigation.

On average, women working in Obama's Senate office were paid at least $6,000 below the average man working for the Illinois senator. That's according to data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007. Of the five people in Obama's Senate office who were paid $100,000 or more on an annual basis, only one -- Obama's administrative manager -- was a woman.

The average pay for the 33 men on Obama's staff (who earned more than $23,000, the lowest annual salary paid for non-intern employees) was $59,207. The average pay for the 31 women on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $48,729.91. (The average pay for all 36 male employees on Obama's staff was $55,962; and the average pay for all 31 female employees was $48,729. The report indicated that Obama had only one paid intern during the period, who was a male.)

McCain, an Arizona senator, employed a total of 69 people during the reporting period ending in the fall of 2007, but 23 of them were interns. Of his non-intern employees, 30 were women and 16 were men. After excluding interns, the average pay for the 30 women on McCain's staff was $59,104.51. The 16 non-intern males in McCain's office, by comparison, were paid an average of $56,628.83.

The Obama campaign did not respond to written questions submitted on the matter Thursday by Cybercast News Service .

During his Albuquerque speech, Obama criticized McCain for supporting the Supreme Court ruling on the pay-equity issue.

"Sen. McCain thinks the Supreme Court got it right," Obama said. "He opposed the Fair Pay Restoration Act. He suggested that the reason women don't have equal pay isn't discrimination on the job - it's because they need more education and training. That's just totally wrong."

Obama continued, "Lilly Ledbetter's problem was not that she was somehow unqualified or unprepared for higher-paying positions. She most certainly was and by all reports was an excellent employee. Her problem was that her employer paid her less than men doing the exact same work."

Make media inquiries or request an interview about this article.



E-mail a comment or news tip to Fred Lucas

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11578373/

Oops! He did it again!

When will this fool learn that we are NOT stupid sheeple? We're going to question everything a POTUS nominee says and we will demand proof!

Classic Obama moment - Do as I say, not as I do!
I can just hear him now: "How DARE you question me!"

This equal pay for women---inasmuch as the political football it has turned into--- is a bunch of nonsense. I doubt that vocations where women can excel have any substantive discrimination. The problem comes in when they have chosen a vocation in which they actually cannot excel---but rely upon the good graces of superiors to remain there--and then believe they are worth the same pay.

I've seen it in the construction industry. Unions or employers wishing to be PC recruit women for jobs that normally involve very heavy lifting, backbreaking positions, hot sun and freezing winters, dangerous machinery---and then the women are given the very easiest jobs because they can't do the normal routine. That is utter hogwash!! Other careers may require a certain amount of mechanical understanding that most men tend to acquire but women ususally don't. Those jobs that men do--and earn more at--are worth more because it is hard to find anyone who can do them---without a risk of injury that could be very expensive.

How many female oil riggers or truck drivers or brick masons do you know? One worst job---concrete finishers, bent over a hot, curing concrete slab on their hands and knees---I have never seen a woman do at all.

It is still a man's world. Get real!

Originally Posted by Captainron

This equal pay for women---inasmuch as the political football it has turned into--- is a bunch of nonsense. I doubt that vocations where women can excel have any substantive discrimination. The problem comes in when they have chosen a vocation in which they actually cannot excel---but rely upon the good graces of superiors to remain there--and then believe they are worth the same pay.

I've seen it in the construction industry. Unions or employers wishing to be PC recruit women for jobs that normally involve very heavy lifting, backbreaking positions, hot sun and freezing winters, dangerous machinery---and then the women are given the very easiest jobs because they can't do the normal routine. That is utter hogwash!! Other careers may require a certain amount of mechanical understanding that most men tend to acquire but women ususally don't. Those jobs that men do--and earn more at--are worth more because it is hard to find anyone who can do them---without a risk of injury that could be very expensive.

How many female oil riggers or truck drivers or brick masons do you know? One worst job---concrete finishers, bent over a hot, curing concrete slab on their hands and knees---I have never seen a woman do at all.

It is still a man's world. Get real!

Captainron, I agree with most of your points, there are always exceptions to the equal pay model. However, these examples do not exist in an office environment.

I love my hubby dearly, but he is soooo mechanically-challenged it's not even funny! The only nail he can hit with a hammer is his own fingernail. I am the mechanical one in this family.

Originally Posted by Captainron

This equal pay for women---inasmuch as the political football it has turned into--- is a bunch of nonsense. I doubt that vocations where women can excel have any substantive discrimination.

You can doubt it, but they do. There's all kinds of lame justifications (like the "men work so much harder!") for it, but at the end of the day women earn less than men and are far less likely to be promoted to executive positions than men.

Getting the government to fix it isn't the proper answer though.

I love my hubby dearly, but he is soooo mechanically-challenged it's not even funny! The only nail he can hit with a hammer is his own fingernail. I am the mechanical one in this family.

Well. let's see---here are some common occurrences in the mechanial world that account for a lot of failure and consequent repairs. Could you explain them using some typical examples?
1. Bi-metallic electrolysis
2. Bearing heat failure
3. Atmospheric corrosion
4. Imbalanced rotation
5. Neglected zerk fittings
6. Inadequate ventilation
7. Voltage drop
8. Inadequate circuitry protection
9. Improper cure time
10. Improper application temperature

Originally Posted by Captainron

I love my hubby dearly, but he is soooo mechanically-challenged it's not even funny! The only nail he can hit with a hammer is his own fingernail. I am the mechanical one in this family.

Well. let's see---here are some common occurrences in the mechanial world that account for a lot of failure and consequent repairs. Could you explain them using some typical examples?
1. Bi-metallic electrolysis
2. Bearing heat failure
3. Atmospheric corrosion
4. Imbalanced rotation
5. Neglected zerk fittings
6. Inadequate ventilation
7. Voltage drop
8. Inadequate circuitry protection
9. Improper cure time
10. Improper application temperature

I would get into a pissing contest with you, if I were a mechanic, electrician or engineer; but I won't and I'm neither.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I am the mrs. fix-it in my family. If I can't fix it, I call a professional.

Well, I knew a rather petite gal who was a diesel mechanic for the city bus company. This was 20 years ago. I have wondered since if she ever burned her fingers or arm on a hot exhaust manifold? Or got a lung full of diesel fumes from a leaking fuel line. Or cut and skinned knuckles from a slipping wrench? Or hurt her back lifting a 150 lb. cylinder head?

I wonder if the female construction workers enjoy sunburned necks, picking metal splinters out of their fingers, handling sharp sections of sheet metal in awkward places, climbing up twenty five foot laders with 50 lbs on their shoulders, walking around on muddy, slippery 2x12 planks thirty feet off the ground in the near freezing rain, or pulling heavy buckets of tools or parts forty feet up in the air with a rope. If something does go wrong are they going to act swiftly to prevent further loss---or panic?

Because of numerous, politically correct efforts to open such occupations up to women---jobs which do pay well--I believe we are faced with the resulting, unintended consequence of illegal immigration. When the "workforce" in reality canot perform the task, the employers are faced with some tough decisions. Many of them have found a way out by hiring illegal aliens. But women who perform a difficult job in hazardous or harsh circumstances should be paid well. Nurses, for example make pretty darn good money. They have a lot of skill---but are able to work in a climate controlled environment, as do office workers. The company however, had to spend some good cash to find people who could make that climate controlled environment in the first place and get it done on schedule no matter what the conditions were.

BTW, I am not an engineer, mechanic or electrician either. I was citing some very commmon reasons for mechanical things to fail---and some understanding of those is essential when determing a corrective remedy, such as for a business experiencing problems of a mechanical nature. Guys tend to understand those things better, because of experience. It is also relevant to political disccussions of why certain policies need to be enacted.

There are obviously jobs men and women are "not created equal" to do. I don't have a problem with that. I don't have the skills or the strength to do any of those things Captainron mentioned. However; illegal aliens from 3rd world countries certainly do not have the skills to do any of those jobs.

There are excellent tech schools throughout the country who can retrain anyone who does have the fortitude to do those jobs. If an immigrant has the SKILLS that we lack in the US, they should definitely be considered for emigration. The illegal aliens we have do not possess any of those skills, therefore need not apply.

If a woman wants to be a construction worker and she can pull her own weight, why not let her? Women have very quick reflexes (gotta with kids) and can withstand pain (childbirth). While we may not have to bulk to do some of those jobs, doesn't make the job we do any less important and it leaves the man to do his part. Harmony at work.

My nephew is a nurse, while he loves the money, he does complain about the running around all shift and nurses DO some heavy lifting. He's thinking he's not cut out for it. Say it ain't so, Joe!