The gender pay gap

[Skids]

^ Do you have any evidence for any of the above claims, or is it all anecdotal?

What I described is exactly what is happening on mining sites. I have witnessed every point I stated.

[pietillidie]

^That wouldn't surprise because it's a classic 'macho' industry, but I can't see it being a bad thing. Standing back, that tokenism would still be fractional; the vivid examples you see just stick out in the mind because they can be so galling.

The shareholders could argue this: the full scope of the organisation, including the long run organisation, is far bigger than single job positions, and tweaking the gender mix will help enlargen the talent pool and help underwrite overall organisational quality. There is greater robustness and less group think in diversity, too. I can certainly guarantee you no reputable executive is going to publicly contradict that.

So, it can also be about future value. This is the part I mentioned above that people miss: present value is the wrong measurement, and it's certainly not where accountants and investors live. Planning, strategy and future return matter, so some of these decisions rightly live at that scale.

Also, as mentioned, demand is basic economics. So, if market demand wants a more balanced gender mix, that's what the market wants. You don't get to pick and choose market demand, and if you're in mining, which is captal intensive, investors are your key constituency because mining products don't really have direct consumer interfaces because they're largely (though maybe not entirely) transformed multiple times before they hit a consumer interface.

[Skids]

My old mates at Roy Hill just copped another kick in the guts.

NPI Superintendent role was vacant. Long standing supervisor in the department had been seconded into the role and was the obvious choice for the position.
Nope. A young female has been appointed to the $250k+ role.

No experience in the position but will be carried along regardless.
The site has a 40/40/20 target to meet and, as long as Iron Ore is sold for the ridiculous price it continues to hold, that will be the goal.

* 40% male, 40% female, 20% 'other'.

[David]

The site has a 40/40/20 target to meet and, as long as Iron Ore is sold for the ridiculous price it continues to hold, that will be the goal.

* 40% male, 40% female, 20% 'other'.

Are you kidding, or do you expect us to seriously believe that?

If there is an actual quota, then I think you can argue the case for it either way. But I think it’s also pretty presumptuous to assume that the "younger female" wasn’t picked on merit. Longevity in a role isn’t everything, and perhaps someone with new perspectives is precisely what’s needed in that workplace.

[stui magpie]

I'm tipping an explosion of miners suddenly identifying as non binary.

[David]

[stui magpie]

^

You also need the actual work to be attractive to females, which by it's nature you'd expect it generally isn't.

Trades and Construction are also male dominated, Nursing and caring roles are female dominated.

[David]

[stui magpie]

Good summary. My view is that, to a degree, certain occupations appeal more to one gender than the other, but that becomes a bit self fulfilling.

I'm sure there has been women who in years gone by wanted to work in traditional male dominated fields, but few would have coped with the inherent sexism in a blokey workplace. Being the only bloke in a female workforce isn't much fun either, even if you're the boss. The bitchiness of women to each other is just draining for a bloke.

Setting 40-40-20 targets in mining has to be purely aspirational, especially considering that Gender diverse people wouldn't make up anywhere near 20% of general society, but yes, hiring and promoting women even at the expense of more suitable males is a way to get more women into the workforce .

Getting men into early childhood roles has it's own different challenges. While the employers would like more men it's often the parents who have concerns about men in that environment which makes it bloody uncomfortable for the male workers.

Also, from my time in public health, men made up a tiny minority of the Nursing workforce but the majority of middle and senior management and most of them were Nurses.

[David]

^ I think that's all fair enough.

On the middle section, I very seriously doubt that any workplace on Earth, short of a radical trans vegan zine stall in Brooklyn, has a specific employment quota for gender-non-confirming people (let alone 20%). Skids is either having a lend of us or just repeating some of the banter that goes on at work around affirmative-action hiring, which I think would tend to demonstrate the problem at hand if so.

[pietillidie]

Skids, I know you must be handy with numbers given your penchant for betting odds, so I assume you're either being satirical here or you've hit the Bacardi 151 and pain killers at the same time

The site has a 40/40/20 target to meet and, as long as Iron Ore is sold for the ridiculous price it continues to hold, that will be the goal.

* 40% male, 40% female, 20% 'other'.

Just a reminder of the non-binary data, which as the ABS shows is itself grossly inflated, if indeed inflating a fraction that small even matters:

The non-binary sex option was marked on the Census form for 43,220 respondents or 0.17% of the Australian population. Analysis indicates this number is not indicative of any single characteristic. Responses show the concept of non-binary sex was not consistently understood and was perceived in different ways by different people. Results cannot be used as a measure of gender diversity, non-binary genders or trans populations. Additionally, it cannot be used as a measure for diverse sexualities, nor can it be interpreted as the number of people with variations of sex characteristics.

Respondents who selected the non-binary sex option in the online form were able to provide more information in a text box. Of those who marked non-binary sex, one third provided a text response. Examination of these responses provides partial insight into how respondents interpreted the question.

Of the one third of respondents who provided a write in response:

three in five indicated a gender identity using terms such as agender, demiboy, gender fluid, non-binary gender and trans woman
one in three repeated the question response option and wrote in ‘non-binary sex’
a small number indicated a sexual orientation using terms such as bisexual, gay, lesbian and pansexual
a very small number indicated a variation of sex characteristics term such as intersex or 47XXY/Klinefelter syndrome.

https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/analysi ... -responses

As an aside, can you imagine that a third or more of the US is so dim, the 'transexualisation' of society keeps it awake at night

[Magpietothemax]

The gender pay gap is not the main issue. The main issue is the class pay gap.

[stui magpie]

^

yep, like why meat bombs on a construction site with a double digit IQ get paid double what Nurses get and triple what Early Years Educators get

[pietillidie]

Intersectionality folks, intersectionality.

[What'sinaname]

^

yep, like why meat bombs on a construction site with a double digit IQ get paid double what Nurses get and triple what Early Years Educators get

See way too many young female standing around doing SFA at entrances to construction sites - usually on their phones or dragging on an e-cig.