5 Reasons Democrats Are Full Of It When They Say The Paycheck Fairness Act Will Help

Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Apr 10, 2014.

  1. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,378
    Likes Received:
    790
    ...#1 - It attempts to outlaw something that is already illegal.“Gender-based wage discrimination has been illegal since the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. If a woman is truly the victim of wage discrimination, she already has the ability to sue.”

    #2 - It ignores the complex reasons that women earn less than men. “It would certainly be wrong to suggest that workplace discrimination is entirely extinct, but the PFA presumes the opposite – that men’s earnings outperform women’s solely because of discrimination and that more lawsuits are the fix. Reality is more complex. The attitude behind the Paycheck Fairness Act completely ignores that women and men may have different preferences and priorities when it comes to pay and jobs.”

    #3 – It burdens employers who haven’t done anything wrong. “Our legal system relies on the philosophy of ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ The PFA inverts that concept by putting the burden of proof on employers to demonstrate that all salary decisions are ‘job related’ and ‘consistent with business necessity.’”

    #4 – It requires every business to report information about employee compensation as it relates to sex and race. “Data collection may sound relatively harmless at first–what’s a little more red tape for businesses already awash in it?–but one can see how such data collection could quickly morph into regulations and government pay-setting.”

    #5 – It makes it more difficult for employers to reward good work, productivity and experience. ”These ambiguous restrictions could discourage employers from paying higher-performing workers more, from allowing employees to take more flexibility in exchange for reduced pay, or from presenting a counter-offer to retain a valuable employee..”


    http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/127...ll-say-paycheck-fairness-act-will-help-women/
     
  2. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,259
    Likes Received:
    619
    All of those points are good points.

    This is yet another example of Democrats seemingly having good intentions in solving a problem with scant thought going into analyzing if their solution is valid or workable.
     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,378
    Likes Received:
    790
    You give them far too much credit. This is not about wanting to solve a problem It is about creating an issue out of something that can raise emotions during an election cycle when things are looking bad for them.
     
  4. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,259
    Likes Received:
    619
    Of course you are correct. But their manufactured issue still fits into my good intentions box as well.
     
  5. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,652
    Likes Received:
    158
    Obviously it is not enforced or it would not still exist.

    What about when women outperform men, but are still paid less?

    All they have to do is equal pay for equal work.

    All kinds of reporting on sex and race is required. All employers have to do is equal pay for equal work and then it would not have to be required.

    It also makes it hard for employers to continue unequal pay for good work.


    Why is it called "Independent Journal Review" when a quick read of their stories show it is anything but independent?

    Regardless this issue will cost the GOP votes. Will it cost them any elections ... only time will tell.
     
  6. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,378
    Likes Received:
    790
    I see the Presidents talking points have shown up here.
     
  7. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,264
    Likes Received:
    4
    I disagree with the good intentions. They are only interested in maintaining their majority. They don't intend to "fix" this any more than they intended to fix health care. This is a made-up issue seemingly meant only to distract from the dismal job the democrats have done since 2006.
     
  8. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,264
    Likes Received:
    4
    The 4 D's of the Democrat Party.

    Divide. Distract. Deflect. Demonize.
     
  9. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,198
    Likes Received:
    376
    Then they can sue. If it is a valid case, they will win.
     
  10. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,652
    Likes Received:
    158
    Really? Are you sure? Can the average woman afford the same level of lawyer as a corporation?

    As a lawyer I read about said, court cases are not about justice, they are about winning.
     
  11. Alcott

    Alcott
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    7,456
    Likes Received:
    93


    Maybe she can hire one of those underpaid female lawyers who is better than an overpaid corporate lawyer. Anyway, regardless of what kind of case, can men afford the same level of lawyer as a corporation?

    Fortunately, so is the gospel of Jesus Christ.
     
  12. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,259
    Likes Received:
    619
    Can't they get some feminist lobbying group to take on her case? Can't they stack the jury with women, or men sympathetic to their cause? Yes, a woman could win a case like this.
     
  13. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,130
    Likes Received:
    221
    Or is it a way for the Dems to get more votes in Nov? -


    Rev Mitchell, thank you for that link - I shared it on a GI political page
     
    #13 Salty, Apr 10, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 10, 2014

Share This Page

Loading...