# The Ubuntu Forum Community > Other Discussion and Support > Ubuntu Women >  Women and Equal Pay in Tech

## Alex J.

Found an interesting article when I was surfing around today:
Wage Gap Narrower for Women in IT.




> IT professions faired better than most in 2007. Computer support specialists appeared closest to closing the wage gap, with women earning 87 percent of what men did in the same occupation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The numbers beat the national average in other categories, including computer and information systems managers and computer programmers (85 percent) and database administrators, computer scientists and systems analysts (84 percent).


As a college student wanting to be in this field, I at first thought "YAY! Less of a wage gap!"

But then I read on to a REALLY REALLY interesting point I had never thought of: 



> "What strikes us is why there should be any. It's a relatively new field and people come in at relatively [the] same education level," said Leber, who explained that there has been a historical bias in many older fields reflecting past attitudes that men worked to support a family and women worked for pin money.


*Why the heck IS there a wage gap here at all?* I mean, some of the older fields I can sort of see, though it's no excuse. Things like the law profession and the medical field have been traditionally dominated by men, and come from back in the day when wage gaps were the norm and pretty standard, those fields are still catching up to the 21st century. 

But the tech field? We're freaking newborns compared to the law field.*Why the discrepancy in such a new field? Thoughts?*

----------


## frankleeee

> Why the heck IS there a wage gap here at all?[/B] I mean, some of the older fields I can sort of see, though it's no excuse. Things like the law profession and the medical field have been traditionally dominated by men, and come from back in the day when wage gaps were the norm and pretty standard, those fields are still catching up to the 21st century. 
> 
> But the tech field? We're freaking newborns compared to the law field.*Why the discrepancy in such a new field? Thoughts?*


Patriarchal dominance is so inherently evil, as well as cultural (Racism)
gaps. These things though seem to be built in to our brains in concrete survival mechanisms, fight or flight, is a abstract example, but I think metaphorically valid. In psychology Women are 60% of the practitioners, although I don't know the wage data.

----------


## mike1234

Isn't there a law about wage discrimination with regards to gender? I agree with your sentiments. There shouldn't be any difference. Especially in the IT field. Unfortunately Misogynists are still around.

M.

----------


## Alex J.

Any ideas why though in the tech field? 

I guess I'm just more optimistic, I was hoping that such a recent field could have gotten over most of the sexism...I mean we did have awesome Grace Hopper...

So you think it's just jerks in the field, rather than having to do with the way that the field/career is structured?

----------


## frankleeee

> Any ideas why though in the tech field? 
> 
> I guess I'm just more optimistic, I was hoping that such a recent field could have gotten over most of the sexism...I mean we did have awesome Grace Hopper...
> 
> So you think it's just jerks in the field, rather than having to do with the way that the field/career is structured?


I don't think there are any empirical answers to this question, since it would involve to many variables to put a statistical data base together, but that doesn't preclude us from speculating.  :Smile:

----------


## mike1234

I think the fact that Dr. Grace Hopper was a Rear Admiral in the Navy helped.  :Smile:  If she had been in the private sector working for some fat bald headed sexist pig, she probably wouldn't have went very far. 

M.

----------


## doas777

I'm sure others have said this, but I asked my Father and my Aunt, both of which have held management positions in IT for decades about this once. Keep in mind, my aunt is a bit of a feminist.

they both agree that the only reason there are fewer women in IT, is because fewer are interested in taking the career path. to be a good programmer or network admin, you have to do a LOT of study to get credentials, and credentials and experience are what get you jobs. My aunt asserted that the reason they make less money extends from the credentials gap. Women she reasoned are less likely to get the certification to get out of the helpdesk and into the server room.

Their consensus was that there are simply fewer qualified women interested in jobs in IT. My aunt really wishes there we're more, as she would hire them in a flash.

just be good at what you do, and don;t look down your nose at the geeks, and you will have no more problem finding a job than any of the rest of us over the next few years.

cheers,
franklin

----------


## Alex J.

> I don't think there are any empirical answers to this question, since it would involve to many variables to put a statistical data base together, but that doesn't preclude us from speculating.


Like I said, optimist. I'd rather not even speculate sexist morons.Though, you're right...shouldn't be excluded....

mike1234, good point with the navy thing, never considered her line of work versus the private sector. The navy was probably a little more desperate and willing to take whatever they could get during that time period. Heh...maybe we should make IT companies engage in battle royales with each other to make them more willing to take women (joking obviously).

----------


## Alex J.

> just be good at what you do, and don;t look down your nose at the geeks


But I am a geek!  :Very Happy:

----------


## Greyed

> *Why the heck IS there a wage gap here at all?* I mean, some of the older fields I can sort of see, though it's no excuse.


( snippage )




> But the tech field? We're freaking newborns compared to the law field.*Why the discrepancy in such a new field? Thoughts?*


What most of these articles leave out and most studies do not take into consideration is that men and women are not equal.  Shock!  Horror!  But it's true.  

I'm not saying that women are not as capable as men in the fields listed above.  They are.  I've known far too many female SysAdmins and Programmers that could run circles around me in either field to think otherwise.  Nope.  It's something else entirely.

Men... can't... get... pregnant.

Pregnancy quite often turns into maternity leave.  Long term leave, medical, maternity or otherwise, is not counted for seniority.  Rightly so since a person who has had 4 different cases of 3-month leave will effectively have 1 year less experience compared to a person who has taken none.

Since those who have more experience tend to get higher pay those who have been actively working in a field longer will have higher pay.

Since men are incapable of the precondition for maternity leave (at most companies, I'm sure there's one or two oddball ones that allow the men maternity leave) they are, statistically as group, going to have a higher average experience in any given profession as compared to women, as a group.

Now, whether that is "fair" is entirely another debate because any way you try to balance it will be unfair to men or women as individuals.  Regardless, any study which shows the disparity of pay for "equal work" without also factoring in seniority/overall experience is pretty much bunk.

----------


## Alex J.

Frankly, if the issue is pregnancy, I'd be a little more worried than just the jerky sexist answer.

A) I assumed that the survey was done with people at the same career level, so not comparing the managers to the average worker. So I don't really see how seniority would be the issue there.

B) It's called working from home, there IS the internet. I worked at a company with several women who were software engineers. During their pregnancy (and remember, they stayed at work full time until fairly late into their pregnancy), they were able to complete the work no problem. They would go into work for meetings, and go home and work on their projects. No issue really. They were even supervisors of others at the time.

----------


## mike1234

There is I have to agree some validity in posters comments about pregnancy and missed work. I'm not saying it's fair nor do I agree with such sentiments. I've heard several comments my employers have made such as, "I don't like hiring women because it distracts the guys" to "we're afraid of sexual harassment lawsuits". Most of my Girlfriends friends are men, because women are jealous of her looks, and see her as a threat. Unbelievable. This whole topic is wide open because there are so many different angles and or opinions. I'm glad to see it being discussed. Sure beats the same old, same old.

M.

----------


## frankleeee

> There is I have to agree some validity in posters comments about pregnancy and missed work. I'm not saying it's fair nor do I agree with such sentiments. I've heard several comments my employers have made such as, "I don't like hiring women because it distracts the guys" to "we're afraid of sexual harassment lawsuits". Most of my Girlfriends friends are men, because women are jealous of her looks, and see her as a threat. Unbelievable. This whole topic is wide open because there are so many different angles and or opinions. I'm glad to see it being discussed. Sure beats the same old, same old.
> 
> M.


The disparity in wage gaps in all areas can probably be linked to cultures and myth and their attachments to each other.

----------


## Greyed

> A) I assumed that the survey was done with people at the same career level, so not comparing the managers to the average worker. So I don't really see how seniority would be the issue there.


So you're saying that, using myself as an example, my close to 10 years of experience in the IT field ranging from technical support, sysadmin and programming work means that I should be offered the same pay as an fresh out-of-school prospect with no work history?  I mean on the exact same position.

Also does this mean that with regular pay increases (say, biannually) that someone who was hired at the same time as me but had 6-months of leave (IE, missed one pay increase) should be at the same pay level as I am?

The above questions are why I said in my previous post "any way you try to balance it will be unfair to men or women as individuals."  Note I specified "leave" and not any specific type.  It is hard to reconcile exceptions based on maternity leave with other differences in experience such as short-term disability which does not end up shafting the worker that really has worked more than other people.




> B) It's called working from home, there IS the internet.


Many companies do not offer that below the executive level.  Even so most of the recipients of maternity leave I have known took it late-term (the latest was 1-week before birthing) and then several weeks to months post-birth where they did not work, not even from home.

----------


## frankleeee

> So you're saying that, using myself as an example, my close to 10 years of experience in the IT field ranging from technical support, sysadmin and programming work means that I should be offered the same pay as an fresh out-of-school prospect with no work history?  I mean on the exact same position.
> 
> Also does this mean that with regular pay increases (say, biannually) that someone who was hired at the same time as me but had 6-months of leave (IE, missed one pay increase) should be at the same pay level as I am?
> 
> The above questions are why I said in my previous post "any way you try to balance it will be unfair to men or women as individuals."  Note I specified "leave" and not any specific type.  It is hard to reconcile exceptions based on maternity leave with other differences in experience such as short-term disability which does not end up shafting the worker that really has worked more than other people.
> 
> 
> 
> Many companies do not offer that below the executive level.  Even so most of the recipients of maternity leave I have known took it late-term (the latest was 1-week before birthing) and then several weeks to months post-birth where they did not work, not even from home.


Can you link us to the survey. :Smile:

----------


## mike1234

I could see that being a real problem for women that have 6 or 7 children. Not the national average of 2.3 (whatever that is). Plus I know a lot of men who have taken up to 90 days off for drug or alcohol related drug rehab. With no apparent loss of job status or benefits. That's why they enact legislation. There is a valid argument from all sides. i.e. nothing would ever change.

M.

----------


## Greyed

2.3 * the 3 month materity leave max = 6.9 months that the average woman is behind their male counterpart.  On a biannual review schedule that is 1 review lost.  Anywhere between 3-5% pay.

Also many women will leave the workforce completely from the time that their child is born until they enter the schooling system.  That's 6-7 years per child.

However since child production is (mostly) serial while the child rearing process can be done in parallel the average 2.3 children could take as little as 6-7 years + .75 year/child past the first.  So for 2.3 that's....


```
>>> 7 + (.75 * (2.3 -1))
7.9749999999999996
```

8 years that any of the leave-the-work-force-until-all-2.3-children-are-in-school women are pushing into the average.

EDIT:  BTW, I just looked at the article.  The cited difference is 13%.  Women on average make 87% the same as men in IT.  Now, look at the above.  3-5% could be accounted for from just maximum-maternity leave alone.  That leaves 8-10% from other factors.  It would be interesting to see how many women are opting out of the workforce for the first several years of their child's life (and men, I've known some men who did it, too) and see how that would eat into the 8-10% range.

What would be really interesting is to compare a man and a woman, both of whom have not opted out of the workforce nor taken any extended leave.  To me that would be a true gauge of the sexist quotient because all other external factors have been eliminated.  It would come down to merit at that point and it should be a 50/50 split when compared on a case by case basis.

----------


## frankleeee

> 2.3 * the 3 month materity leave max = 6.9 months that the average woman is behind their male counterpart.  On a biannual review schedule that is 1 review lost.  Anywhere between 3-5% pay.
> 
> Also many women will leave the workforce completely from the time that their child is born until they enter the schooling system.  That's 6-7 years per child.
> 
> However since child production is (mostly) serial while the child rearing process can be done in parallel the average 2.3 children could take as little as 6-7 years + .75 year/child past the first.  So for 2.3 that's....
> 
> 
> ```
> >>> 7 + (.75 * (2.3 -1))
> ...


Your argument seems valid except that in studies with all things being equal there is a gap. I if so inclined will search my university library databases for peer reviewed empirical studies, but school starts tomorrow for me so I am not really that motivated right now.

----------


## Greyed

> Your argument seems valid except that in studies with all things being equal


All things are never equal.  That goes double when comparing groups which is why I really loathe comparing groups.

BTW, something else I thought of.  What would the difference 20 years later be if someone missed one review period and fell behind 3% on an annual review?  Presuming every review was 3%...



```
>>> a = [1.0, .97] # 3% difference...
>>> for x in range(20): # now we increase each 3% 20 times...
...     a[0] = a[0] * 1.03
...     a[1] = a[1] * 1.03
...
>>> a
[1.806111234669415, 1.7519278976293324]
>>> a[1] / a[0] 
0.96999999999999986
```

9.7% difference from missing a single 3% bump early on.

----------


## frankleeee

> All things are never equal.  That goes double when comparing groups which is why I really loathe comparing groups.
> 
> BTW, something else I thought of.  What would the difference 20 years later be if someone missed one review period and fell behind 3% on an annual review?  Presuming every review was 3%...
> 
> 
> 
> ```
> >>> a = [1.0, .97] # 3% difference...
> >>> for x in range(20): # now we increase each 3% 20 times...
> ...


I found a study which is to large to be posted if you would like to see it I think it can be sent via PM. Yes you can say that things are never equal, but when you use a statistical method in a study using dependent and independent variables, this is the method of scientific inquiry, a fairly accurate answer can be found within the demographics.

----------


## mike1234

To reduce it to simplest terms however, and with all things being equal, "Bob" is not worth more than "Sally", just because he is a Male. College is no substitute for real world experience either. College glosses over subjects too quickly I believe. At least my College did. Cisco was the only course of merit, Novell was worthless, Program Logic could have been taught in 30 minutes. It's not easy doing apples and oranges comparisons. Senority and wage increases are a valid argument. I don't think anyone entering the workforce should earn as much as their experienced counterparts. But then logic doesn't always enter into any equation. I entered the workplace earning as much as the guy who had been there 5 years. Boy, was he pissed. How was I to know? 

M.

----------


## frankleeee

> To reduce it to simplest terms however, and with all things being equal, "Bob" is not worth more than "Sally", just because he is a Male. College is no substitute for real world experience either. College glosses over subjects too quickly I believe. At least my College did. It's not easy doing apples and oranges comparisons. Seniority and wage increases are a valid argument. I don't think anyone entering the workforce should earn as much as their experienced counterparts. But then logic doesn't always enter into any equation. I entered the workplace earning as much as the guy who had been there 5 years. Boy, was he pissed. How was I to know? 
> 
> M.


The databases I am talking of are world wide searches of published studies that are performed by professionals in their fields, not rhetoric from a class. This search can be done with many limitations to bring up peer reviewed empirical studies, which is the highest structure of published studies. Granted any study can be dissected to find fault within the study itself, but when reviewed by others within a field to be published in respected journals in specific fields, the data is way more likely to be closer to accurate. I give this post as a bit of information, if your comment on the college experience is based on my offer to find solid data, if not then never mind.

----------


## mike1234

> The databases I am talking of are world wide searches of published studies that are performed by professionals in their fields, not rhetoric from a class. This search can be done with many limitations to bring up peer reviewed empirical studies, which is the highest structure of published studies. Granted any study can be dissected to find fault within the study itself, but when reviewed by others within a field to be published in respected journals in specific fields, the data is way more likely to be closure to accurate. I give this post as a bit of information, if your comment on the college experience is based on my offer to find solid data, if not then never mind.


 No my College comment was based on my own experience. What I learned at University barely prepares anyone for what they will encounter in the workplace. Too many variables. In simple terms 4 years of school does not equal xx years of real world experience. At least not in my case. And I seriously doubt if it would in any other scenario.

M.

----------


## elizabeth

Note: I'm in the US, so my views are slanted toward the US and our culture, the situation of women in IT varies around the world (although almost always is quite grim).




> But the tech field? We're freaking newborns compared to the law field.*Why the discrepancy in such a new field? Thoughts?*


There is a fantastic book on the subject of general pay gap called Women Don't Ask: Negotiation and the Gender Divide. It dispels a lot of the sexist myths surrounding the situation (hint: women get pregnant whether they are in law or tech!). It's also a very, very encouraging book and I recommend it to every woman I know who is entering the workforce, or trying to get further ahead.

As the title suggests, it's not about being offered different pay on the outset, there are laws about this in a lot of countries, it's that women are more likely to accept what is offered, not negotiate, or not negotiate enough.

Why is it so much worse in the tech field? There are all kinds of reasons, some of which are explored in the fantastic book Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. One that they mention, and one of the authors admits being guilty of, is lack of encouragement early on (the author admits, the household computer was placed in her son's room, not her daughters, she barely even thought about it until confronted with the numbers). Girls simply aren't encouraged to get into computers. If they are interested, they are rarely encouraged to continue. When I was in High School I was always tinkering, but it never occurred to me or my career counselors that it was a viable career option. 

Indeed, I read an article recently that had an interview with the inventor of the Roomba (the vacuum robot): Robot Inventor Helen Greiner. On the second page of the article is the a Q&A with her, the first of which is the following:




> *Did you get much encouragement when you were growing up?*
> I was hacking away on computers, and I was on the school math and chess teams. It is still a surprise to me that I wasn't encouraged. People just didn't think about women going into technology.


Lack of encouragement is huge. Though some of us can overcome it we are left feeling like we're behind all through school and college. As a general rule, males start with computers earlier, have more friends who work with them, have encouragement and egos bolstering their successes. When a less experienced person (woman, geek or not, or simply someone male or female, who isn't a geek) steps into a classroom with a bunch of male geek classmates who have huge egos and years of encouragement, it's intimidating. As _Unlocking_ explains, women often get scared off and quit their IT degrees early in their career because they believe (true or not - usually not!) that they can't keep up and that they have to work harder than everyone else.

IT is specifically susceptible to this because it is a field that you can start getting into when you're 12. There aren't many preteens gathering the hard core skills they will need to become a lawyer.

How does this relate to pay? A majority of women in IT undervalue and underestimate their skills because of this (myself included, but I'm starting to wake up to it, I was a fierce negotiator with this job and am now the highest paid admin in my company!). A male with a similar skill set may have a much bigger ego and better negotiating skills, so when both get to the table to get a salary, he'll fight for more. And unfortunately starting pay in the industry is important, women start lower and don't get as high. Encouraging women to negotiate just as strongly, and value their skills enough to believe they deserve it as much as their same-skilled male counterparts from the beginning of their career is what will start to close this gap.

How do we do this? Having groups like Ubuntu Women and LinuxChix was vital to my success in IT (I work as a Debian SysAdmin). Women in IT groups make us feel less alone, we can share our horror stories about the industry, look to gain encouragement from each other, ask for salary and negotiation advice. If it wasn't for encouraging local friends AND LinuxChix, I would have given up long ago. Letting women know that these groups exist before they quit is important. Also more programs that encourage girls early on and through college (as the authors of _Unlocked_ are working on) would be very helpful.

Cheers,

----------


## Alex J.

> There are all kinds of reasons, some of which are explored in the fantastic book Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing.


SWEET! I was just looking for a good book to read.




> It dispels a lot of the sexist myths surrounding the situation (hint: women get pregnant whether they are in law or tech!)


Yeah, I wasn't really buying the seniority/pregnancy issue as legitimate argument. Women have been having children and still becoming the best in their field for centuries. Though you don't normally accrue seniority during leave for pregnancy, the leave is no different if you take time off due to a health issue or disability. And seniority is not the only factor in promotions and raises.

And quite frankly, I think most women are clever enough to time it and work it so they can avoid most issues. Not that I believe women should have to jump through hoops to have a kid...




> As Unlocking explains, women often get scared off and quit their IT degrees early in their career because they believe (true or not - usually not!) that they can't keep up and that they have to work harder than everyone else.


...you bring that up RIGHT as I find out that my programming class lost its last female student (except for me). Grrrr.

----------


## frankleeee

I am taking a Industrial and Organizational Psychology course at this time, and the issue of unequal pay is addressed in the 3rd chapter of the book. The empirical studies show that women are payed less then men for the same work applications, not the same jobs always but the same value of measurement. The book also says that managers of women also make less whether male or female. The seniority and pregnancy argument is bunk as the OP agrees.

----------


## cooldude

Yes, what has already been mentioned, is some women don't have very good negotiating skills when going up for job offers. Often accepting the first offer for a position at a lower pay. 

I will tell you right now they will try to hire you for the least amount of money as they can whether or not you are male or female.

The key is DO YOUR RESEARCH FIRST!!! Know the pay range for the job you are applying for. For an example if a pay range for an entry level position may pay anywhere from $27,000-45,000 they may offer you the minimum of $27,000. If you try to go too high, expecially if not experienced enough may not get it. So go IN BETWEEN like $35,000.

And this is not just for IT positions either, but many others ones too.

----------


## doas777

Elizabeth,
good luck with your endeavors. it sounds like your participating in some kewl stuff.

best regards, 
franklin

----------

