Accused of Underpaying Women, Google Says It's Too Expensive to Get Wage Data

[DarkStar_WNY]

Ok, so all women are lazy and stupid, compared to all men who are all well above average in intelligence and the hardest working people alive. Got it. thanks for the information

Actually the DOL's own report, which is used to promote the wage gap BS shows that men on average work more hours then women, and in fact men are 2.5x to work 60 hours a week then women are. It also shows that a large percentage of full time women only work 35-39 hours a week and that when compared to men working who also work 35-39 hours a week women make 13% more than the men.

But see these are what you and the rest of the left might call inconvenient truths and as such you ignore them since they don't prove your case so they must be buried!

Typical SJW when faced with facts they try to muddy the water and misrepresent what you said. Even though it's backed up by actual evidence. While they only base their views on what they feel like.

Exactly!

+1 for you!

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

It has nothing to do with them having it right on hand but more to do with their statement. It will take 500 hours and cost them $100,000 to get this information. They said that is too costly for them to comply. If we were talking about some small company that has $300,000 in profit a year then sure. However when you make billions a year, $100,000 really isn't anything to you.

The government pulls in trillions a year in taxes and yet if you want copies of records more often then not they will charge you a fee to provide you with the information, ironically it's been found again and again that agencies will demand insanely high fees to as to discourage media and other sources from requesting records.

Also you have to remember, just because the government demands something doesn't mean they are entitled to force you to provide it. Several years back we had OSHA come into our plant and found a few small issues, and while settling these some of the demands they made were crazy. They wanted full employment records for EVERYONE who has worked there in the past 10 years, including visitors from within and from outside of the company as well as any contractors. I suggested to our lawyers that they tell the DOL to fuck off, although I did suggest they use legal terminology to do it.Now keep in mind we were a small plant with only about 70 employees oh which 11 were salary personnel (4 shift supervisors, managers for Production, Quality, Shipping/Receiving and Maintenance, as well as a plant manager, an HR/payroll manager and myself who was the Projects Manager.) As it was, by the time of this request we had already provided 8 reams worth of copies to them (which is actually 16 reams we copied since we needed two of each, one for our lawyers and one for OSHA.) There was a period where for more than two weeks between two of us we had the copy machine going for 12-`16 hours a day, we actually burned out the one we had originally as it wasn't up to that volume of work.You ever try to sort and keep 16k+ sheets of paper organized? Let me tell you, it's a blast.

Basically they wanted to bury us in paperwork so we would just agree to their terms, which would have basically required us to shut our doors as we could never have run a plant with the "interpretation" of the inspector we had.

 

[M76]

What facts? The person I replied to stated that no women should be paid the same as a male as males bring more to the table as males are more creative in thinking, they are willing to work more hours than any female, take less time off, work harder....
.

#notall . Of course not fucking all. But you can't declare that women are being dicriminated against and start subsidizing them just because they're women. You need to examine each case individually where the suspicion of gender discrimination is raised. Numbers are only one thing, there are numerous other contributing factors that I see play out right before my eyes. How is it that discrimination charges are only levied when the subject is a lucrative field or executive position? Yet noone ever says women are discriminated against in mining? Why because it's not a desirable job for women, that's why. You can't have equality of outcome, get over it.

 

[Cyraxx]

5 mins for a DBA to do a DB query if a finance member cant do it? Ouch Google.

Pretty much, you can't tell me there isn't a database with a table of employee's that include Name, SSN, date employed, position, and salary.

 

[krotch]

It has nothing to do with them having it right on hand but more to do with their statement. It will take 500 hours and cost them $100,000 to get this information. They said that is too costly for them to comply. If we were talking about some small company that has $300,000 in profit a year then sure. However when you make billions a year, $100,000 really isn't anything to you.

I wasn't talking about level of effort or money required to comply. I really don't care about that. I was just talking about people thinking Google actually has that data on hand. I highly doubt they do. I doubt any company has such to show why X person gets pay more/less than X person. Or why Y person didn't get a raise or bonus. They'll just have A person makes B amount. Although I'm sure Google has some kind of employee performance system, which they could hand over and let the DoL figure it out.

If you're talking about the cost to do, yes, 500 man hours and $100k is nothing. Even if you multiplied those figures by 10, it'd still be nothing to Google.

What facts? The person I replied to stated that no women should be paid the same as a male as males bring more to the table as males are more creative in thinking, they are willing to work more hours than any female, take less time off, work harder....

Stating something doesn't make it fact. People say that they seen big foot and the loch ness monster. That doesn't make them real. I personally can counter any of those comments with people that I know. Which while I know that doesn't mean that my counter applies to 100% of people, I know that at the very least means that their statement doesn't apply to 100% of people.

I would love to see them just make different pay charts.

Degree with 0 experience = X amount
Degree with 1 year experience = X amount
Degree with 2 years experience = X amount
Willing to work overtime = pay differential X percentage
Non-standard work hours = pay differential X percentage
Whatever certification = pay differential X percentage

The choice to take less time off is a personal one and shouldn't factor into pay. If that somehow matters, then give less benefits, so they can't take as much time off. If someone works harder than another person, then maybe management needs to get involved and reprimand the person who works less. Dock their pay, give them more work, etc.

If they want to just pay different rates due to that, make it known and add it into my pay chart.

Take less time off = small pay bonus every quarter
Works hard = small pay bonus every quarter

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

The choice to take less time off is a personal one and shouldn't factor into pay. If that somehow matters, then give less benefits, so they can't take as much time off. If someone works harder than another person, then maybe management needs to get involved and reprimand the person who works less. Dock their pay, give them more work, etc.

If they want to just pay different rates due to that, make it known and add it into my pay chart.
4
Take less time off = small pay bonus every quarter
Works hard = small pay bonus every quarter

How can it not, not only be considered for pay but also for promotions, at least if it's done by merit?


For example let's say you have two assistants working for you, both have the exact same qualifications and start off at the same salary, let's call them A and B and they both are scheduled to work from 9-5 each day.

Person A does their job, and does it well, but aren't able or willing to work past 5 o'clock, no matter the demand.

Person B does their job and does it as well as person A, but person B will work over to insure projects are done on time, or to help me or others complete tasks that are normally outside of their responsibilities.

Okay, now they've both worked for you all year and it's time for reviews, bonuses, and/or pay raises.

Would you award each of them the same bonus and pay raises? And please explain why?

Now let's take it a step further, 6 months after the above a senior assistant spot opens up and it comes with a 20% pay raise, but work hours will vary based on how much extra help those you manage might need to do their jobs in a timely manner.

So, as stated above, both person A & B have the same qualifications, and the only difference the difference in their work for you as stated above. Who do you promote and why?


Okay, one last question, if person A happened to be a female, and person B a male, would that change you actions above, and if so why?

 

[Criticalhitkoala]

Ok, so all women are lazy and stupid, compared to all men who are all well above average in intelligence and the hardest working people alive. Got it. thanks for the information

You remind me of drax there buddy, the point just completely went over your head.

 

[Biznatch]

It's ok, they'll just start hiring all H1B's and pay them all much lower salary equally...

 

[westrock2000]

they should hire a woman to calculate it, I hear they are cheap

It would only cost $77,000 if they hired all women, if my google searches are to be believed.

 

[Criticalhitkoala]

Whether Google has the information readily available or not is irrelevant. And whether or not Google makes a hefty profit or not is irrelevant. The point is that this is yet another government over reach. Extending it's claws into private enterprise yet again. The DOL, like every Federal agency has no profit motive, no competition, no reason to be efficient. Over budget? Out of money? No problem!!! Just raise taxes again and soak the people.

Makes me sick. The Federal government is bloated, self serving, and inefficient. And US taxpayers foot the bill for that. I find it sadly comical that the Feds want to put their nose into a company that actually makes money instead of wasting it.

Leave it to free markets. If women do not like what they are getting paid at Google, they can work somewhere else. Good tech jobs are hard to fill. If Google is deciding to under pay women, they will pay a price for that by not securing the top women for the job. We need to stop thinking of the Federal government as our Nanny to wet nurse everyone and take care of everyone's problems. They need to build our highways, raise an army, protect our borders, and stay the heck otherwise out of our lives.

I own my own business and I am SICK of federal regulation. I'm tired of the IRS, Department of Labor, OSHA, and a slew of other agencies all positioning themselves to tell a private enterprise how to run...even though there isn't a federal agency that exists that runs efficiently. That last few years have been hard to make it. We have 800 employees that support their families with food, mortgages, medical care, schooling, and you name it. And, like all businesses over 100 employees (considered a "big business") we have to report our wages by age, race, gender, and more. It takes hours and wastes resources. If employees don't like what we can afford to pay, they can go elsewhere. We are far beyond the years of kids working in the mines, and factory workers working in crazy unsafe environments. I'm all for some basic regulations. But forced social engineering through the federal government is a bridge too far for me.

Dude man, I just want to say thank you for your contribution and helping give almost a thousand people jobs. I respect your hard work and agree with you on the arm chair quarterback position the government has.

I hope the best for your company in the years to come.

 

[Criticalhitkoala]

It would only cost $77,000 if they hired all women, if my google searches are to be believed.

It's probably why they are aiming for ladies and not african american farmers...cause 40 acres and a mule in California would be over $77,000

 

[westrock2000]

I own my own business and I am SICK of federal regulation. I'm tired of the IRS, Department of Labor, OSHA, and a slew of other agencies all positioning themselves to tell a private enterprise how to run...even though there isn't a federal agency that exists that runs efficiently. That last few years have been hard to make it. We have 800 employees that support their families with food, mortgages, medical care, schooling, and you name it. And, like all businesses over 100 employees (considered a "big business") we have to report our wages by age, race, gender, and more. It takes hours and wastes resources. If employees don't like what we can afford to pay, they can go elsewhere. We are far beyond the years of kids working in the mines, and factory workers working in crazy unsafe environments. I'm all for some basic regulations. But forced social engineering through the federal government is a bridge too far for me.

If you are comfortable saying, what would you say is the pay gap between men at your company for employees doing the same job? Not accounting experience, performance, or anything, just job/pay grade alone.

 

[TheBuzzer]

at least google have the money to do all of that and still wont get screwed over completely.

 

[nightfly]

I still cant wrap my head around the fact that if US Companies are so greedy, why do they willing turn away an opportunity hire women and pay them 18-28% less than their male counterparts for the same job? There shouldn't be a male in any office building in the country. But I guess that's just my patriarchy talking. I apologize.

Far too many people believe in conspiracies. But the basic thing everyone forgets: Greed tops morality every single time in this country.

You're absolutely right; if there were a way to hire a specific group of people to increase profits even only 0.1%, corporate execs would fire their own relatives in order to make more money for themselves.

Some say that's what made America great. Absolutely no conscience what so ever. Just pure, simple, basic, greed.

 

[krotch]

How can it not, not only be considered for pay but also for promotions, at least if it's done by merit?


For example let's say you have two assistants working for you, both have the exact same qualifications and start off at the same salary, let's call them A and B and they both are scheduled to work from 9-5 each day.

Person A does their job, and does it well, but aren't able or willing to work past 5 o'clock, no matter the demand.

Person B does their job and does it as well as person A, but person B will work over to insure projects are done on time, or to help me or others complete tasks that are normally outside of their responsibilities.

Okay, now they've both worked for you all year and it's time for reviews, bonuses, and/or pay raises.

Would you award each of them the same bonus and pay raises? And please explain why?

Both get small raises for getting an extra year of experience. Person B gets time and a half for overtime and a small bonus for working overtime.

Now let's take it a step further, 6 months after the above a senior assistant spot opens up and it comes with a 20% pay raise, but work hours will vary based on how much extra help those you manage might need to do their jobs in a timely manner.

So, as stated above, both person A & B have the same qualifications, and the only difference the difference in their work for you as stated above. Who do you promote and why?

Give both the option and let them know that X position has varying work schedule. If they can't meet the schedule, they need not apply. If both still apply and everything is the same. Flip of the coin. If they didn't get it. Well...life sucks and I don't care. I'm moving on.

Okay, one last question, if person A happened to be a female, and person B a male, would that change you actions above, and if so why?

Wouldn't change anything, cause they do the same work with the same level of effort. If somehow the difference sexes, physical capabilities, etc were to affect work, then I'd adjust my pay to factor that in. Like if it were physically demanding, I wouldn't base it on an hourly wage, but on a production wage. Produce 1 object, make X amount. The more you produce, the more you make.

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

Both get small raises for getting an extra year of experience. Person B gets time and a half for overtime and a small bonus for working overtime.




Give both the option and let them know that X position has varying work schedule. If they can't meet the schedule, they need not apply. If both still apply and everything is the same. Flip of the coin. If they didn't get it. Well...life sucks and I don't care. I'm moving on.




Wouldn't change anything, cause they do the same work with the same level of effort. If somehow the difference sexes, physical capabilities, etc were to affect work, then I'd adjust my pay to factor that in. Like if it were physically demanding, I wouldn't base it on an hourly wage, but on a production wage. Produce 1 object, make X amount. The more you produce, the more you make.

But your giving person B overtime for the extra time they spent at work has not made their earnings higher then person A, so if person B is male and person A is female you have just shown that women earn less in the same position then men in your company, which according to the wage gap myth is sexist.

But as I said they are salary and thus don't get overtime pay, thus any extra time put in is the person's choice help those around them and the company.

But overall you answered the question, and made me glad you aren't my boss as for some reason you seem to think putting forth extra effort, and time, is meaningless in regards to your work, work ethic, qualifications and merit. Let me guess, you either work for the government or in a strong union environment where individual effort is viewed as meaningless, which has been a major issues in those environments.

 

[krotch]

But your giving person B overtime for the extra time they spent at work has not made their earnings higher then person A, so if person B is male and person A is female you have just shown that women earn less in the same position then men in your company, which according to the wage gap myth is sexist.

Not sure how it'd be sexist, if Person A, the female can also work overtime.

But as I said they are salary and thus don't get overtime pay, thus any extra time put in is the person's choice help those around them and the company.

No, but that's where bonuses come in. Either way, salaried employees can make overtime. Some places do, some places don't. I'm in a place that can, so long as it's approved first. I can't just decide to work overtime on my own and get it.

But overall you answered the question, and made me glad you aren't my boss as for some reason you seem to think putting forth extra effort, and time, is meaningless in regards to your work, work ethic, qualifications and merit. Let me guess, you either work for the government or in a strong union environment where individual effort is viewed as meaningless, which has been a major issues in those environments.

I wouldn't increase pay on the basis of your work ethics, as that can easily change. One year your shit hot, next year, you're just shit. Sure, you can do things like have pay cuts, but that'd just kill morale. Not just for that single worker, but those around them also, cause guess who'd quickly be complaining about it. Instead, quarterly bonuses. That'd keep you putting in that extra effort to get that bonus. Sure, you'd be bummed out when you don't get it, but you wouldn't be as sad/mad/etc from a pay cut.

I work as a government contractor. Work, work ethic, qualitications, merit, etc are taken into consideration. Got 2 pay raises and a bonus last year. Do I care? Not really. I do what I do and I help others do what they need to do.

I don't see any kind of fair system going on between different races or sexes, if it's up to some random person to make these decisions.

 

[TroyTalksNoMore]

The only thing I heard was...

MOAR WOMENZ!!!!

 

[DarkStar_WNY]

Not sure how it'd be sexist, if Person A, the female can also work overtime.

Well, that is the point of the earnings gap that they say exists, and blame on sexism, when in fact there are many reasons, the most obvious and simple is that the study they used showed that men worked more hours.

 

[Dillirium]

I'm actually surprised to see so many people hating on Google for this. Two things come to mind.

1. If the government came to you said, prove your not guilty by spending $X,XXX monies, would you?

My answer would be for them to prove i'm guilty. I'm "innocent" until proven guilty.

2. Most companies grow by acquisition. Do you not think with acquisitions there's <insert number here> payroll systems from hundreds if not thousands of Payroll personnel?

Most companies don't have easy buttons for this sort of thing. Most innovation happens to the customer facing crowd because that's where the money is. For us "overhead/cost" departments it's, here's some scraps that sales don't want.

 

[Dillirium]

Whether Google has the information readily available or not is irrelevant. And whether or not Google makes a hefty profit or not is irrelevant. The point is that this is yet another government over reach. Extending it's claws into private enterprise yet again. The DOL, like every Federal agency has no profit motive, no competition, no reason to be efficient. Over budget? Out of money? No problem!!! Just raise taxes again and soak the people.

Makes me sick. The Federal government is bloated, self serving, and inefficient. And US taxpayers foot the bill for that. I find it sadly comical that the Feds want to put their nose into a company that actually makes money instead of wasting it.

Leave it to free markets. If women do not like what they are getting paid at Google, they can work somewhere else. Good tech jobs are hard to fill. If Google is deciding to under pay women, they will pay a price for that by not securing the top women for the job. We need to stop thinking of the Federal government as our Nanny to wet nurse everyone and take care of everyone's problems. They need to build our highways, raise an army, protect our borders, and stay the heck otherwise out of our lives.

I own my own business and I am SICK of federal regulation. I'm tired of the IRS, Department of Labor, OSHA, and a slew of other agencies all positioning themselves to tell a private enterprise how to run...even though there isn't a federal agency that exists that runs efficiently. That last few years have been hard to make it. We have 800 employees that support their families with food, mortgages, medical care, schooling, and you name it. And, like all businesses over 100 employees (considered a "big business") we have to report our wages by age, race, gender, and more. It takes hours and wastes resources. If employees don't like what we can afford to pay, they can go elsewhere. We are far beyond the years of kids working in the mines, and factory workers working in crazy unsafe environments. I'm all for some basic regulations. But forced social engineering through the federal government is a bridge too far for me.

The points you noted above are accurate. As you mentioned, basic regulations would need to be put in place because there are still bad employers out there. Some would truly sell out a family member to just get $1 more. Thank you for your hard work. Some of us do take notice and appreciate it!

 

[krotch]

Well, that is the point of the earnings gap that they say exists, and blame on sexism, when in fact there are many reasons, the most obvious and simple is that the study they used showed that men worked more hours.

Probably. At which point, they just left out how many hours people worked. Just that men, made more than women.