First there was the WallStJobs.com Press Release: Unemployment Spikes, but Women Fare Better Than Men - WallStJobs.com Sees Women Retaining Jobs at a Higher Rate. Then, charts and commentary. Today, additional thoughts on the topic and a response from WallStJobs.com.
"Is this guy kidding? So, we get more work, more responsbility, more hours, but less pay, and that will be considered equality?
The jobs that we are keeping are not going to get us promotions to break the barriers - the jobs that are being retained in this economy by women, are the jobs that are not being affected by recession. It isn't because they are lower paid, it is based upon supply and demand. Pink collar jobs, nursing, administration, customer service are stable and are predominately women fields.
The jobs that men are losing, are jobs that have been hit by the recession - construction, manufacturing, etc.
If you notice, jobs that are consistent across the board, ie Teachers, Sales, Technology - jobs where women and men are paid by tenure, or experience fairly (generally) - you will see that both women and men are being treated fairly.
The comments that this gentlemen stated are the very reasons today why women are not being recognized - I wrote an article a few years ago defining the problem that continues to be pervasive, and the WallSteetJobs comments exemplifies that there is still a lot more to be done."
"I don't know about the women vs men issue but, in my experience, companies often make sweeping changes that impact many, not carefully husbanding the best resources.
One layoff at Apple saw the entire enterprise sales force taken out. Including senior people with longtime relationships with the major publishing companies. The following month the company announced that they were focusing on the commercial publishing market with renewed vigor. I asked, "With what? You just laid off every senior cintact with our primary customers in that segment."
Additionally, layoffs can be very political as managers force rank employees. You would need to review what the managers motivations were to determine how that would go. If they're looking to reduce budgets it's one thing. If it's a sales department and they've got quotas, they'll go for producers. etc"
"In this era of economic uncertainty, there are some undeniable truths. First, women are keeping their jobs at higher rates than men. Second, in many sectors, there is pay inequity -- and women who are earning less are less expensive to retain than their higher-earning male counterparts. This piece in no way stated that companies would keep female employees who were ineffective. Skilled, capable employees, female and male, are a company's most valued asset.
The point that Ms. Ashley misses in the piece is its most essential: As women retain their jobs at a higher rate than men, we usher in a new era of women in power. More women will keep their jobs and rise to higher and higher levels in every area of business and government. As this groundswell of success grows, there will be a critical mass of women in positions to change the inequities that have been so unfairly forced upon them.
The women who are keeping their jobs are clearly valued employees who excel at what they do. They are beating the odds in an era where cost-cutting and layoffs leave virtually everyone at risk. The numbers support these points, and I look forward to a time when there is no inequity in the workplace--a balance that will only be achieved when women are in high-powered positions in great enough numbers to effect change. Current employment trends are moving management demographics in that direction. That is a phenomenon to be celebrated, not criticized."
Robert Graber, President & CEO
WallStJobs.com
Stay tuned.