At Google Men Are Paid More Than Women

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,532
Google, you have some 'splainin' to do!


The Pay Disparity at Google - A spreadsheet compiled by employees provides a snapshot of salary information at the internet giant. Below are the average 2017 base salaries of 1,194 employees in the United States — about 2 percent of Google’s global work force — for six pay levels.
 
Women have come a long way. Good for them. Still don't like working for them (in general). Too bitchy. It always seems like they feel like they have something to prove. They don't though, relax!
 
Very rarely are men and women at the same company sitting in the same departments with the same amount and quality of experience and making vastly different incomes, and I'm sure this - by and large - is not the case at Google either.

It's just that women have a knack for picking specialties that that have lower pay than the specialties men tend to pick, and even when they have the same specialty, often have less experience than their peers of the same age due to being more likely to take extended time off for family reasons, like having children than their male counterparts, and then there is the negotiation differences as mentioned above as well

The standard 77 cents on the dollar slogan is compete bull. When you properly account for self selection and amount of relevant experience there still is a difference, but its in the low single digits. This is not good, and we should probably do more to make this more fair, but if we want to have any hope of solving the problem we need to first understand it, and the truth is, there is no vast conspiracy in smoke filled rooms of good-old-boys clubs to pay men more.

Attacking the problem from this perspective is never going to solve it.
 
Last edited:
So the bulk of the pay levels have less than a 10% disparity, even leaving out all other factors negotiation of salary alone can account for that. This is of course assuming that all comparable pay levels were for the same or similar positions, and that the male and female employees in those positions had the same amount of experience and same amount of time working at google.

If those weren't the same, then the "disparity" is meaningless.
 
Google being so forward thinking should publish all their employees exact salaries, backgrounds, and genders, with extremely detailed (2+ pages each) descriptions of each individual's duties at the company. Also provide each employee's original resume, and their original offers, and what was negotiated. This way an actually useful conclusion based on a real dataset can be extrapolated.

Oh wait, that's ridiculous? Instead we're going to draw conclusions from a small sample size and cluster people into 'levels' of pay for pretty graphs that fit our narrative? Anyone publishing this garbage really needs to be put out of business.
 
If you actually look at broad studies. They will show a ~7% pay disparity between men and women. This is on par with the difference between active negotiators of pay and reluctant negotiators of pay.

I know lots of guys who don't like asking for raises, but they don't mind switching jobs. One thing I never see in any studies is how willing or reluctant women are to give up the stability of an existing job. It's an interesting question.

The google chart does bring up something else I find potentially very, very interesting in this issue. That being the question of if women are getting financially screwed due to workplace reform.

Put it this way. Where I work, we are incentivising the hiring of women into good jobs. Not so much into the grunt labor jobs. So like the goolge chart, it would often be the case the the tirer 1 jobs represent a lot more men in poorly paying positions for longer. The tier 2 jobs would represent skilled and educated entry level or newer workers. We pay women a bit of a premium there. However, most of the time the system of raises within a position are not really merit based and more COLA type stuff. The raises from promotion are capped to a max, and we are promoting more women earlier. Which means over time, they are getting paid less at the higher levels because they move up the ladder faster.
 
This is flat out wrong and was pointed out

They compare them based upon "Level" and not Job

This study compares a Level 2 software engineer and a Level 2 Human Resources and then shouts that a person with a high level of technical talent is paid more than a dime a dozen profession...

Can't believe SJWs will manipulate data this badly to try and get someone less vital to a companies success paid a lot more.

I remember friend of mine interviewing at same company as me at the exact same time, we figured we'd both ditch current employer together so we wouldn't have to work with their Sr guy who had previously worked with us and was just a dunce. My offer was $13,000 higher than hers, she was flipping out and claimed it was because she was a woman. I simply asked her "How much did you tell them you made?" she replied with "What I was getting, 65k" and I told her that was her problem I had told them a much more inflated value when I realized that my interview ended up being me telling them how to do their job. I was then a little miffed that she was being paid 65k when I was get 55k but that was ok because she had a computer science degree...I had 2 years more experience than her and more responsibilities. She ended up going back asking for more and got a few K more, thanks to me, but always held that I was getting paid more than her over my head...as she left work earlier and took far less risk while I pointed out their Sr. guy was incompetent and fixed his issues non stop.
 
For a company that claims they want to be at the front of the diversity fight, they put a lot of effort in to fighting the release of their own wage/salary data. http://fortune.com/2017/05/27/google-gender-wage-data-reporting/

They are real quick to compile and sell for profit data on everyone else, they should just come clean and publish their entire wage/salary list. I would be very surprised if they don't already have a quarter by quarter chart of their salary break outs. Data mining is what they do.
 
This is flat out wrong and was pointed out

They compare them based upon "Level" and not Job

This study compares a Level 2 software engineer and a Level 2 Human Resources and then shouts that a person with a high level of technical talent is paid more than a dime a dozen profession...

Can't believe SJWs will manipulate data this badly to try and get someone less vital to a companies success paid a lot more.

I remember friend of mine interviewing at same company as me at the exact same time, we figured we'd both ditch current employer together so we wouldn't have to work with their Sr guy who had previously worked with us and was just a dunce. My offer was $13,000 higher than hers, she was flipping out and claimed it was because she was a woman. I simply asked her "How much did you tell them you made?" she replied with "What I was getting, 65k" and I told her that was her problem I had told them a much more inflated value when I realized that my interview ended up being me telling them how to do their job. I was then a little miffed that she was being paid 65k when I was get 55k but that was ok because she had a computer science degree...I had 2 years more experience than her and more responsibilities. She ended up going back asking for more and got a few K more, thanks to me, but always held that I was getting paid more than her over my head...as she left work earlier and took far less risk while I pointed out their Sr. guy was incompetent and fixed his issues non stop.

lol, wtf would you tell a potential new employer exactly what you were making previously?
 
For a company that claims they want to be at the front of the diversity fight, they put a lot of effort in to fighting the release of their own wage/salary data. http://fortune.com/2017/05/27/google-gender-wage-data-reporting/

They are real quick to compile and sell for profit data on everyone else, they should just come clean and publish their entire wage/salary list. I would be very surprised if they don't already have a quarter by quarter chart of their salary break outs. Data mining is what they do.
How about no? That is private employee information. Even if they don't attach names to the position it can be easily figured out who makes what. This will just cause unwanted turmoil in the work place. People always believe they are underpaid and other are over paid.
 
Women are a higher risk to employ and require higher benefits, such as maternity leave. Men don't get 6-8 weeks off, paid, when they have a kid.

There's your pay disparity.


So 8-12 weeks (lets say 6k $ pay vacation) is ok to discriminate for the next 30 years at 3-10k salary difference? That is 90-300k difference over time because they had a baby. lol
 
So 8-12 weeks (lets say 6k $ pay vacation) is ok to discriminate for the next 30 years at 3-10k salary difference? That is 90-300k difference over time because they had a baby. lol
When that 6-12 weeks of maternity leave completely fucks up productivity for departments, may result in having to hire temp employees or paying overtime if positions require it(or simply burn out other people quicker due to the increased workload to make up for the missing employee) and can happen more than once, YES. Obviously not every position is as crucial as others, but it's entirely possible that such a leave of absence can completely screw things up for a business. Now obviously this is not an issue for every woman due to a variety of reasons, however if a woman finds themselves in a position where they are negotiating their salary(or re-negotiating it) and maternity leave is a non-factor then it should be brought up at the table.

I'm also not sure where you're getting this 6k figure from, since that would be on the low end. At $100k salary, 12 weeks is $23,076, which does not factor in productivity issues or the possibility of hiring a temp, or overtime. Hell, even at $52k that's still $12,000 for 12 weeks which is double your $6k you seem to have got from nowhere. This sort of thing is also the reason a lot of employers will cap how much paid time off you can keep on the books, so they don't have employees just saving it forever and then taking 3 month vacations due to the disruptions that causes(in addition to avoiding a massive payout when that employee leaves).

Hell, even ignoring how much the paid time off actually costs, if one of my employees were to need that much time off at once it would guarantee I'd have to hire at least a temp and then deal with all of the trouble of getting them up to speed, then eventually let that person go after the employee comes back from their 12 weeks off and wait for that person to catch back up since this isn't a factory job screwing lids on jars or whatever that I'm talking about.
 
I'm a low life working class guy who works in oil and gas, you can easily make more money here than the vast majority make at google(tech in general) plus we have diversity hire bonuses, so if you don't have a penis you get more money right from the get go.

Yet women outside of the offices jobs are a rare sight... why do we not see the level of anger over the lack of women non cushy jobs even though those jobs have extremely high pay and you get paid even more simply for being a woman.

p.s: you get fired on the spot for racism/sexual harassment at these oil/gas jobs(at least up here in Canada) so its not that.
 
Simple averages can be very deceiving. I would like to see the range and SD as well on those numbers. As one statistics wag once said, "Statistics is like a bikini, often what it hides is more important than what it reveals."
 
I am all for woman making the same amount as men. I am also asking that fathers receive fair treatment in Family court which we do not.

Amen to that. That's the reason why I don't like people calling themselves feminists. It's as though equal rights only apply to women, nevermind men or other minority groups. Replace feminist with equal rights advocate.. There ya go, changes the perspective a little doesn't it.
 
So 8-12 weeks (lets say 6k $ pay vacation) is ok to discriminate for the next 30 years at 3-10k salary difference? That is 90-300k difference over time because they had a baby. lol

Your figures are way off.

When that 6-12 weeks of maternity leave completely fucks up productivity for departments, may result in having to hire temp employees or paying overtime if positions require it(or simply burn out other people quicker due to the increased workload to make up for the missing employee) and can happen more than once, YES. Obviously not every position is as crucial as others, but it's entirely possible that such a leave of absence can completely screw things up for a business. Now obviously this is not an issue for every woman due to a variety of reasons, however if a woman finds themselves in a position where they are negotiating their salary(or re-negotiating it) and maternity leave is a non-factor then it should be brought up at the table.

I'm also not sure where you're getting this 6k figure from, since that would be on the low end. At $100k salary, 12 weeks is $23,076, which does not factor in productivity issues or the possibility of hiring a temp, or overtime. Hell, even at $52k that's still $12,000 for 12 weeks which is double your $6k you seem to have got from nowhere. This sort of thing is also the reason a lot of employers will cap how much paid time off you can keep on the books, so they don't have employees just saving it forever and then taking 3 month vacations due to the disruptions that causes(in addition to avoiding a massive payout when that employee leaves).

Hell, even ignoring how much the paid time off actually costs, if one of my employees were to need that much time off at once it would guarantee I'd have to hire at least a temp and then deal with all of the trouble of getting them up to speed, then eventually let that person go after the employee comes back from their 12 weeks off and wait for that person to catch back up since this isn't a factory job screwing lids on jars or whatever that I'm talking about.

This guy gets it.
 
What is the average time spent working by each gender? On average, are men spending more time working than women, or is it the same?
 
Your figures are way off.



This guy gets it.
Thank you. I was originally wondering if someone had replied to me screaming that I'm some sort of sexist even though I mentioned that this is something that can be discussed when negotiating salary. Killing productivity can be an absolute nightmare for some companies or even just departments.

And like NeghVar mentioned, is this a case of women putting ion 40-45 hours/week while men are doing 45-50? Or is it actually the same? Because even though it's obviously anecdotal there's a huge disparity in people putting in time on the weekend and after hours at just about every company I've worked for over the past couple decades.
 
So volunteer survey shows that a 2% sample of the company has less than a 10% wage disparity. Negotiating entry wage, and years worked are not shown...

Also not shown (but assumed) is the survey was not 50/50 spit from men to women.

Years worked, and worked at current level, would certainly give better information to this graph.
 
This is funny. You'd think that employees who work for a company that deals in data analysis and aggregation, they would know better how to properly present this data and make it valid
 
Thank you. I was originally wondering if someone had replied to me screaming that I'm some sort of sexist even though I mentioned that this is something that can be discussed when negotiating salary. Killing productivity can be an absolute nightmare for some companies or even just departments.

And like NeghVar mentioned, is this a case of women putting ion 40-45 hours/week while men are doing 45-50? Or is it actually the same? Because even though it's obviously anecdotal there's a huge disparity in people putting in time on the weekend and after hours at just about every company I've worked for over the past couple decades.

Where I work the men are the ones typically working late and on weekends. Some women do, but they are usually sans kids. The others can't work late or on weekends, because "kids".

I work in healthcare, btw.

One of my pay negotiating points is my ability to work late and on weekends. I have no children. Neither does my wife, nor will she ever. A flexible schedule is important to employers.
 
They just need to have pre-set pay grades (steps/categories) for every job. That way no matter who gets it, they all get paid the same.
 
I'm still pissed the head of HR at my work (a woman!) is making a lot more than me. She's been here for decades and is in a higher, professional level position. But, I've earned it. I need my living wage. Damn gender discrimination.

Too many variables. If they can say "x worker with 10 years experience with the company in similar roles, similar work results, etc.. and come up with a large wage gap, then I'd consider it.
 
Has anyone even considered that the women just don't do good work, and get payed less because they have not demonstrated quality? Has anyone asked if the women are token employees who do not actually contribute in any way?
I suspect most of the women at Google are over-payed and unnecessary except for keeping virtue signalling lefties pacified. I suspect that most of the women at google contribute nothing to quality products or services provided by google.
 
Tenure, position starting salary, performance increased and annual raises also has to be factored in. If a position started at $50k ten years ago, but only starts at $55k today, someone that started 10 years ago would be making considerably more than someone starting today. Things like this are rarely factored in to "but mah wages are lower" reports and studies.
 
Has anyone even considered that the women just don't do good work, and get payed less because they have not demonstrated quality? Has anyone asked if the women are token employees who do not actually contribute in any way?
I suspect most of the women at Google are over-payed and unnecessary except for keeping virtue signalling lefties pacified. I suspect that most of the women at google contribute nothing to quality products or services provided by google.

Wow. Just wow.

The female engineers I've met that work for large corporations (one of them Intel) are just as talented/smart as their male counterparts.
 
If you actually look at broad studies. They will show a ~7% pay disparity between men and women. This is on par with the difference between active negotiators of pay and reluctant negotiators of pay.

I know lots of guys who don't like asking for raises, but they don't mind switching jobs. One thing I never see in any studies is how willing or reluctant women are to give up the stability of an existing job. It's an interesting question.

The google chart does bring up something else I find potentially very, very interesting in this issue. That being the question of if women are getting financially screwed due to workplace reform.

Put it this way. Where I work, we are incentivising the hiring of women into good jobs. Not so much into the grunt labor jobs. So like the goolge chart, it would often be the case the the tirer 1 jobs represent a lot more men in poorly paying positions for longer. The tier 2 jobs would represent skilled and educated entry level or newer workers. We pay women a bit of a premium there. However, most of the time the system of raises within a position are not really merit based and more COLA type stuff. The raises from promotion are capped to a max, and we are promoting more women earlier. Which means over time, they are getting paid less at the higher levels because they move up the ladder faster.

Yes. When people talk about a glass ceiling, they don't talk about a glass floor. Men in general gets placed in jobs that are tier 1 (hard labor, dangerous, etc) WAY more than women. The glass floor for women is higher (tier 2) so it makes sense the "glass ceiling" would be lower for women (maybe).
 
How about no? That is private employee information. Even if they don't attach names to the position it can be easily figured out who makes what. This will just cause unwanted turmoil in the work place. People always believe they are underpaid and other are over paid.

They could apply the same anonymization routines they claim prevents the stuff they collect on us every time we browse the web, buy something or travel somewhere from being used to identify an actual person. Good enough for the world, good enough for Google employees.
 
Has anyone even considered that the women just don't do good work, and get payed less because they have not demonstrated quality? Has anyone asked if the women are token employees who do not actually contribute in any way?
I suspect most of the women at Google are over-payed and unnecessary except for keeping virtue signalling lefties pacified. I suspect that most of the women at google contribute nothing to quality products or services provided by google.
Well that was idiotic and unnecessary.

I'm not going to pretend that I'm anything but a right leaning conservative(for the most part) person who is sick of a lot of left wing bullshit. However, this kind of crap from the right isn't doing anyone any favors either. There are dozens of factors(quite a few of which have been brought up in this thread) that contribute to discrepancies in pay in most of these types of reports, that do not need to rely on an assumption of the employee simply being a crap employee. If you're going to counter something, do it with facts instead of just coming up with the most asinine assumption possible, otherwise you're doing nothing but giving crazy lefties(not every left leaning person is a crazy virtue signaling weirdo either) ammo to point at that we're all just sexist assholes assuming women are somehow incapable of getting work done.

Even just in my own experience over the years I'd tell you that's complete bullshit, while hours actually spent working or even simple negotiations are a bigger issue. Neither of those is related to the quality of work done.
 
Back
Top