income differences between men/women

<p>I saw this tonight when looking up information about my town and did a double take:</p>

<p>The median income for a household in 2010 was $52,935, and the median income for a family was $62,534. Males had a median income of $44,071 versus $27,746 for females. </p>

<p>I checked near by towns and found similar results. Is it like this everywhere? I'm glad to see I'm doing better then the average female however that number seemed very low compared to the male number.</p>

<p>That number includes women that dont work.</p>

<p>May also include men who don't work. Last time I looked, there were more women in the workplace than men.</p>

<p>I doubt it includes people who don't work.</p>

<p>Back when I wrote my honors thesis in college in the 70s, women were earning about 70% of what men were, in the same or comparable jobs. A recent article I read said that in the US, there is still a significant wage gender gap, but it is narrowing to 82%.</p>

<p>Gender</a> pay gap is smallest on record - USATODAY.com</p>

<p>United</a> States of Wage Gaps - Map of the Gender Gap in Pay by State - NYTimes.com</p>

<p>This only takes into account full-time workers. This does not account for the many who are part-time workers of both genders.</p>

<p>Given that women are more likely than men to downsize their careers for a period of time while raising children, I wonder whether the gap can narrow much more than it already has.</p>

<p>The effects of "mommy track" choices -- such as part-time work or switching to a job that does not involve overtime or travel -- don't just affect the individual's income during the period when she limits her work life in this way; they also limit her income later on because she will not have progressed as far in her career path as a person without such limits.</p>

<p>I'm not saying that this is a bad choice, though. In fact, I made the "mommy track" choice myself, and I don't regret it. But I definitely earn less now than I would have if I had not limited my career while raising my children.</p>

<p>^ ... the summaries I have read said correcting career choices (professions chosen, time out for kids, etc) closes the gap quite a bit but still leaves a substantial gap ... correcting for education and career choices women make something like 90-95% what men make ... getting closer but still not on par.</p>

<p>I believe Marian's post covers the professional gap. I work in a male dominated field and am compensated above the average. </p>

<p>However, looking at a non-scientific sample of my female friends. Many dabble in part-time employment and those that are full-time are not in very well paying occupations. Contrasting that to my men friends who are almost all in very white-collar, upper tier professional jobs it's really hard to think there's any big mystery to unravel here.</p>

<p>I don't see much point or relevance to simple stats like this one that, depending on the source, aren't surprising given that many women might not have an income during the child-rearing years, might have a reduced income due to working part time or a self-limited more flexible job to make it easier to raise the kids, and/or could be hit with the career slow-down due to lost years and therefore less experience and job growth due to being out of their career for some period of time.</p>

<p>What's relevant is a like/like comparison to see if gender is a factor.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Last time I looked, there were more women in the workplace than men.

[/quote]
Really? That's hard to believe. Do you have any stats to reflect this? I'm saying it because at the end of the day there are still a lot of women who are SAHMs - way more than SAHDs.</p>

<p>The general income and so-called "comparable" jobs data are highly dubious.</p>

<p>
[quote]
However, looking at a non-scientific sample of my female friends. Many dabble in part-time employment and those that are full-time are not in very well paying occupations. Contrasting that to my men friends who are almost all in very white-collar, upper tier professional jobs it's really hard to think there's any big mystery to unravel here.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Your point is well taken, but I don't like the connotations of the word "dabble."</p>

<p>Many people who work part-time have good reason for doing so. That good reason often involves the need to commit some of their time to family responsibilities.</p>

<p>The trend in careers and employment is towards "entrepreneuralism" and "outsourcing" and "consulting" and "flex-time" and "virtual workplace".
Once again, the women are leading the way LOL.</p>

<p>The LT hierarchical career that some white males still have is going the way of the dinosaur, IMO. Our kids' reality will be very different.</p>

<p>I'm sure taking off time to have kids derails plans and could knock peoples salaries off.... but the difference here was about 50% which just seemed a bit nuts. I do know in my extended family there are two stay at home moms and one stay at home dad. I'm not sure if it takes that into consideration or not. </p>

<p>Most of my friends that are female have pretty decent paying jobs - but so do most of the men I am friends with. I guess there are a lot of girls waitressing part time and whatnot.</p>

<p>Yes, "pink collar" jobs would impact if the data were all working women (excluding STAHMs). It's entirely possible if this is true that women who sell jewelry or cosmetics or something from home counted themselves as "employed." I still think there is a wage gap, but I think it is far narrower than it was in the late 70s and 80s especially in large corporations where pay scales are calibrated based on job classification...however I would guess many women are at the bottom of the tier and many men are at the top of the tier which could account for 10% or more disparately in pay.</p>