Does it exist?

If so, why does it exist?

Yes.


Because corporations are typically mandated to maximize company profits, and that includes low-balling female employees on their salaries whenever possible.

Because corporations are typically mandated to maximize company profits, and that includes low-balling female employees on their salaries whenever possible.

No.

On the corporate part, the specific legalities are hotly debated, but in practice it is generally accepted that unless the corporation is set up as a B-Corp, a Certified B-Corp (different), or as a conventional S-Corp or C-Corp but with uniquely specific governing documents, then yes, they have shareholders who want to see the best possible performance and typically have male executives who are 40+ years of age and come from a different era/school of thought.

https://www.litigationandtrial.com/2010 ... e-profits/

https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/3 ... e_legally/

http://www.corporatepolicy.org/2012/03/ ... e-profits/

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2 ... ze-profits

As for proof of the gender pay gap apart from any corporate law, the body of research is quite sufficient:

https://www.aauw.org/research/the-simpl ... r-pay-gap/
https://www.dol.gov/wb/resources/Womens ... Gap_17.pdf
https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/d ... search.pdf
https://www.vox.com/2018/2/19/17018380/ ... re-penalty

I don't see how low-balling female employees would be a viable solution.

What evidence would you accept that might change your mind, tragabigzanda?

It's not.

I haven't clicked your links, but can we just define our terms before we start? What's the size of the gender gap you're claiming? I agree that one exists, but I think evidence shows it's much smaller than the widely used $0.79 on the dollar that gets tossed around so frequently. So let's start there.

What part of my mind are you proposing to change?
That a gender pay gap exists?
Or that, forgetting the legalities, corporations are typically operated to maximize profits?

Of course they want to maximize profits. I don't want to read through all your links. Is there proof in there that low-balling female employees is a point of operation in order to do so?

The growth of the "gig" economy generates worker flexibility that, some have speculated, will
favor women. We explore one facet of the gig economy by examining labor supply choices
and earnings among more than a million rideshare drivers on Uber in the U.S. Perhaps most
surprisingly, we find that there is a roughly 7% gender earnings gap amongst drivers. The
uniqueness of our data—knowing exactly the production and compensation functions—permits
us to completely unpack the underlying determinants of the gender earnings gap. We find that
the entire gender gap is caused by three factors: experience on the platform (learning-by-doing),
preferences over where/when to work, and preferences for driving speed. This suggests that,
as the gig economy grows and brings more flexibility in employment, women’s relatively high
opportunity cost of non-paid-work time and gender-based preference differences can perpetuate
a gender earnings gap even in the absence of discrimination.

Yes.


Because corporations are typically mandated to maximize company profits, and that includes low-balling female employees on their salaries whenever possible.