Tuesday, April 8, 2014

No One Celebrating This Occasion...

April 8 is Equal Pay Day, marking the number of extra days into 2014 the average woman has to work to earn as much as her male counterpart did in 2013. No one who cares about economic justice and the rights of women is celebrating this occasion.
and
It isn't about 'the ring finger', or the 'helping hand' -- isn't it more about a fair shake? A level playing field? And : if it doesn't get fixed - is it gonna be a middle-finger world?

Does this here include the UC Labs?: Womenstake, NWLC's Blog

President Obama Announces an End to Pay Secrecy Gag Rules for Employees of Federal Contractors

Posted by Beccah Golubock Watson, Fellow | Posted on: April 07, 2014 at 12:22 pm
On Tuesday, President Obama will sign an executive order prohibiting federal contractors, who employ close to one-quarter of the U.S. workforce, from retaliating against employees who discuss their pay with each other. The President will also direct the Labor Department to adopt regulations that require federal contractors to provide compensation data based on sex and race to the Department of Labor. These important steps will strengthen enforcement of equal pay laws for women and ensure that some workers can talk about pay without fear of retaliation.

Punitive pay secrecy policies require employees to keep the amount they are paid secret and ban them from sharing this information with their coworkers. These policies are surprisingly common. A 2011 study by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that over 61 percent of the private-sector workers surveyed reported that discussing their wages is either prohibited or discouraged. These policies allow discriminatory practices to flourish. Fear of retaliation only exacerbates the many hurdles employees face in gathering information that would suggest they have experienced wage discrimination.

President Obama’s Executive Order is a decisive step against punitive pay secrecy policies, but the case against these policies has been growing for some time. Studies show it does not make business sense to penalize workers for talking about pay.


--more here as well

Thus, a good reason for this UCOP tool to exist and to use it? Don't think the UC Labs are included though in that tool. -UC and the Paycheck Fairness Act-

Much more background on the Paycheck Fairness Act in this HuffPo section.
__
Mothers and fathers of sons and daughters in CA--College Readiness Not Keeping Up in CA

The sobering numbers do not tell the whole story, according to John Rogers, director of UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access. Once students who drop out or do not finish high school in four years are removed from the equation, the proportion of public high school graduates who met the UC and CSU entrance criteria in 2012 drops to 30 percent statewide, 20 percent for Latinos and 18 percent for African-Americans, Rogers said.

(So much of 'the conversation' forgets that women have sons and fathers have daughters...and, hopefully, by and large, the parents want good opportunities and experiences for them.)
__
IHE on the 'star chamber potential' side of things- lots of 'pro Title IX' folks are 'anti-star chamber' folks, as well- the exact consistent way it should be-- Pro Title IX and also Anti Star Chamber. see: Going on Offense With Title IX

and US Senators push for more fed staff on Title IX- but is it just a problem of needing more staff, or is it also about qualifications?
__
In case you missed it- many scenarios, facts, figures on higher education used in this:


One of the panelists is Mona Charen and she wrote a bit about the UCSB sign saga she called "Professors as Petty Tyrants" ... (the thing about Charen is that her comments leave one wondering.. if she were to get her wish - that everyone gets married-- would she then move on to wanting everyone to have certain types of marriages, w/ certain rules about roles, etc.?) among many other concerns
Anyhow, on that whole UCSB thing...what comes to mind is an Irvine incident a few years ago on one aspect and an episode of Designing Women in reviewing other aspects to how these situations arose/arise...

The Chicago Tribune had a commentary that mentioned other recent incidents nationally and it took on indirectly some of the questions raised by an Irvine case from a few years ago.-

(There's more detail, comments from various sides on it here if you are unfamiliar with the story and how it breaks down.
And, this Inside Higher Ed article about retaliation in academia from another perspective. Would love to see the counter op-ed points, too.)

The Bloodworth-Thomasons were creators and producers of a television show called Designing Women. They also are/were(?) friends of Bill and Hillary and helped w/ the first B. Clinton presidential campaign. Not sure if they helped with the more recent HRC run for Senate or POTUS. Anyway, there's an old episode that hits on several of the same elements the UCSB incident raises- and some old higher ed stereotypes in the mix too to reflect back on: Julia Sugarbaker Drives Over the First Amendment-- It's the late 80's- early 90's all over again... pls no.

You can watch it in the youtubes...


it's a two part episode- 2nd half here..

__
fyi
and there are... ahem...internships on some of the above.
__
btw, Did they put any of the plaques in the offices of California Hall?

No comments:

Post a Comment