Shock, Horror: If You Put Water on it, it Gets Wet!

I saw this in the news yesterday, and naturally the BBC is on it like a starving Chihuahua on a pork chop. Apparently, women who return to work part-time after having children earn less than men who don’t. Also, the women miss out on promotions and gain less experience. according to shock “studies”.A 60s advert by Alcoa Aluminum with spoofed tagline

Obviously, this statement of the blindingly obvious is wrong, because the law says that women must be promoted ahead of men wherever possible, and companies who choose the most able candidate instead of a female – where the two options deviate – are committing a heinous criminal offence. Likewise, companies who insist of acting logically based on the current space-time continuum and who choose to employ people based on the experience they actually have rather than the experience they might have gained if they hadn’t gone AWOL for a year (and intermittently when they return if the child-minder phones up and says that junior is crying). And absolutely no concern should be raised over the likelihood of them doing the whole thing at least twice more over the next 3-4 years, no matter how important the company’s expansion from simple start up into the international market is.

It’s funny, but I have male pupils who have trouble getting time off for driving lessons and tests even if they’re dead. The females seem to have very little trouble.

I wonder if anyone is ever going to realise that unless you officially declare men to be inferior members of society, women – who, by dint of nature, have to do/experience things which are absolutely counter to what is required in a successful business – are going to be scored accordingly. Of course, when I use the terms “men” and “women” I am referring to the groups generally – there are some women who can do some things men normally excel at much better, just as there are men who can do things that women normally excel at much better. However, if nothing else, the “just being available for work” skill is pretty much lacking when childbirth comes into it. The “not having the experience” and “missing promotions” cards fall naturally out of that, and the only way many women get promoted is simply by being women. Because the Law is on their side on that.

Equal rights is one thing. Forced balance (i.e. positive discrimination) is another matter entirely.

In the workplace, people who do the same job, for the same number of actual hours, and with the same commitment should be paid the same. Someone who does the job part time in order to bring up a family can only expect pro rata at absolute best. And by pro rata, I mean when all the fringe benefits not given to anyone else are taken into account. When you add all that up, there can never be a line right down the middle where all men and all women are earning the same and getting the same opportunities without artificial adjustment.

(Note: the image I’ve used in this article came from a real 60s advert in America. The company was Alcoa Aluminum, to which someone has added that last line in brackets. The funny thing is – and everyone forgets this – before technology advanced, most woman (and a lot of men) would have had trouble getting a ketchup lid off, so the advert wasn’t quite as overtly sexist as it appears today.)

(Visited 2 times, 1 visits today)