Kamala Harris Wants To Punish Companies Who Supposedly “Pay Women Less” Than Men

Much like the man-made climate change and “a baby in the womb is not a baby” arguments, the Left continually spreads the bogus lie that women are systematically paid less than men for the same work in order to slap some more socialistic regulations against corporations that could end up hurting women far more down the line than it would end up helping them.
 
And much like any other idiotic Leftist, 2020 Democrat candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Red Light District), announced earlier in the week a plan to “close the gender wage gap”, which the Left often claims is due to horrible discrimination against women (a ridiculous claim, but one they always make).
 
According to the Daily Wire, “Harris’ plan would require companies to report information about their pay policies and the pay of men and women in the company. They would also be required to spend time ‘applying for a mandatory Equal Pay Certification from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’, The Associated Press reported. Under Harris’ plan, if a company fails to receive this certification, it ‘would be fined 1% of their profits for every 1% wage gap they allow to persist for work of equal value.’”
 
There are a couple of things that really could be quite terrible for companies with what was just mentioned above. First, that “fined 1% of their profits” does not specify if that means quarterly or annual profits, which can make a difference. Second, what does “for every 1% wage gap they allow” mean exactly? Does that mean that the company would be fined 1% for every percent of a “wage gap” found in each individual case? Or does someone do the math to see how much men made on average versus women and fine the difference in percentage? It’s this sort of lazy, perhaps willfully incompetent wording that can really screw a company over. If terms aren’t well-defined, that can cause some major problems.
 
Now, that’s just the announcement. I would imagine the actual wording of the plan is not quite this asinine, but it’s the Democrats we are talking about here.
 
In any case, that’s not all that is included in Harris’ plan. That was just in case a company did not apply or receive an "equality" certificate.
 
According to the AP, “In Harris’ equal-pay plan, the campaign says, companies would be prohibited from asking about prior salary history as part of their hiring process, banned from using forced arbitration agreements in employment contracts for pay discrimination matters, and would be required to allow employees to freely discuss their pay. They would also be required to report the share of women who are among the company’s top earners, the total pay and total compensation gap that exists between men and women, regardless of job titles, experience and performance.”
 
Now, I’m no expert when it comes to hiring someone or seeking a high-paying job, but I cannot imagine any of these things are a great plan for people, especially for women.
 
Why would it help to not mention a prior salary in the hiring process? If a company is looking for someone to fill a position, they would look to see what sort of job they had before and roughly how much they were earning for that job (granted, I imagine people sometimes, if not often times, lie about how much they were earning in a previous position so they can negotiate for a considerably higher salary for the position being discussed, but still.) Not mentioning how much one was previously making doesn’t help anyone to earn more money in negotiations.
 
But regardless of my knowledge of the hiring process, I know very well that the last item is quite outrageous, as it would CREATE THE IMAGE OF A WAGE GAP EXISTING.
 
You see, while there is no wage gap, there is an earnings gap. But that has nothing to do with what the company policies are regarding a person’s salary. As a matter of fact, and something the Left always conveniently forgets, it is illegal under the Equal Pay Act of 1963 to pay women less than men for the same position and amount of work. Key there being the amount of work put in.
 
The simple fact is that men tend to work longer hours per week than women do. A number of reasons for this can exist, such as a woman’s desire to spend time with her family, a woman’s ability to work for longer periods of time, etc. But what makes that last proposal even worse is that it not only ignores the hours spent in a work equal to a man, but also “compares the average or median earnings of men and women, without taking into account things like careers… or experience,” according to the Daily Wire.
 
Different jobs at different levels in different departments will vary widely in terms of pay. For example, a CFO, according to salary.com, will make, on average, around $370,000 a year. A COO, or Chief Operating Officer, will make $470,000. A Vice President of Sales will make, on average, $250,000, while a VP of Finance will make around $200,000.
 
Both a CFO and COO are the chief executives of their respective branches, both hold basically the same level of their departments, only being below the CEO in the company’s hierarchy. And yet, a CFO makes less money a year than a COO makes. A Vice President of Sales is basically on the same level as a Vice President of Finance, but the VP of Sales makes more money on average than a VP of Finance does.
 
So say you have a female CFO and a male COO. Based on what we just learned, is it fair to say there is discrimination here based on the money they each make, despite their basically equal levels in the company? What if the opposite were to be the case? What if the female COO makes more money than a male CFO? Is that also a problem of gender discrimination?
 
Ironically, a recent Google internal study found that the company tended to pay women more than men for the same work and had to pay $9.7 million to the employees who were paid less, which usually was men.
 
That was back in March and I didn’t hear about this from anywhere on the fake news media or any politician on the Left.
 
But considering Harris’ plan is meant to “help” women, I imagine Google paying women MORE than men actually would not have forced them to pay that 1% per wage gap that Harris is proposing. If men get paid less than women, that is either ignored or believed to be a good thing.
 
Oh, and to add to this entire situation, Harris’ plan “would also require federal contractors to close their wage gap within two years or they would not be able to apply for federal contracts worth more than $500,000.”
 
Considering this plan from Harris would do nothing to actually close that “wage” gap, as it is not up to the companies (much less the government) to determine how much money someone earns depending on the amount of work that they put in, that would largely mean that no federal contractors would be able to take on contracts that are massive in size, like building high-speed trains, or doing anything that the LEFT wants to do regarding tearing down old buildings and building new, environmentally-friendly ones if the GND were to pass (though federal contractors not being allowed to do that sort of thing would be the least of our worries in that hypothetical scenario). So this sort of policy would especially hurt Democrats who are all about spending as much money as possible, including things regarding to federal contracts.
 
What’s worse is that this sort of plan actually hurts women far more than it helps them. If companies would be punished for showing wage gaps between genders, what reason would they have for hiring more females if they would likely (certainly) bring nothing but trouble once they have to report the gaps – that would not go away – to the government and be fined for something they have no control over?

Men tend to work longer hours, so companies would look to hire people who can output more of a workload, especially if there comes a serious financial risk of hiring a woman at any position, if there would exist a gap regardless of career, experience and performance. Notice how I talked about the AVERAGE salaries of top positions. That is because the actual salary will vary depending on things like experience. So there will ALWAYS be a gap when an experienced man is paid more than an inexperienced female even within the same job and title.
 
The current CFO of Apple, Luca Maestri, makes $1 million a year, base. Microsoft’s current CFO, Amy Hood, makes $570,000 base (both make millions more through shares, but we are talking about wages here). Does that mean that Microsoft is more sexist than Apple? Or does that mean that maybe, just maybe, Luca Maestri has more experience in such a high position than does Amy Hood?
 
So even within the same job (albeit in different companies), people make varying wages DEPENDING ON THE THINGS HARRIS WANTS TO IGNORE TO “EXPOSE” (really, create) A WAGE GAP!
 
It would simply be too great of a risk for a company’s profit margins to hire women, when they would tend to be paid less than men even for the same job, simply because women tend to work less hours than men do.
 
It would actually hurt small businesses even more as well, as they are the ones less likely to be able to take such financial hits. The reason massive corporations are okay with raising the minimum wage is because they know they can afford it but their competitors might not. It’s crony capitalism at its worst and this wage gap myth falls in line with that.
 
It would especially become troublesome if the government were to pass a law that said companies had to have a certain ratio of male to female employees. At that point, smaller companies would be forced to take the “wage” gap hits.
 
The simple truth is that companies legally cannot pay men more than women ever since 1963, but that correlates to the amount of work actually done. If a man and a woman work the same amount of hours a week, they will be payed the same. If a man works more hours than a woman does (as tends to be the case, on average), then the man will be payed more because he worked more. If a woman works more hours than a man does (which isn’t typically the case), the woman will be paid more than the man because she worked more. THAT is equality, not this woke, SJW crap that serves nothing more than to score political points but would actually harm women more if actually applied.
 
Galatians 3:28
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!