Logo

    232. A New Nobel Laureate Explains the Gender Pay Gap (Replay)

    en-usOctober 10, 2023
    1
    Freakonomics Radio

    788 Episodes

    What are the factors contributing to the gender pay gap?
    What does Claudia Goldin suggest for achieving gender equity?
    How does historical perspective influence the gender pay gap understanding?
    What percentage of earnings disparity is due to within-occupation differences?
    Why is complete sameness between men and women not the goal?

    • Reconsidering the Gender Pay Gap: A Historical Perspective and the Role of Good DataThe gender pay gap is influenced by more than just discrimination, highlighting the need for a nuanced understanding and thorough examination of historical context and data.

      The gender pay gap is not solely due to discrimination against women receiving lower pay for equal work. According to economist Claudia Goldin, who recently won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for her research on women's labor market outcomes, there are other factors at play. Goldin's extensive research has shown that understanding the roots of the gender pay gap requires a historical perspective. It is crucial to consider whether the pay gap is a temporary blip or a significant issue. Additionally, Goldin emphasizes the importance of good data in reaching these conclusions. This key takeaway challenges the commonly held belief that discrimination is the sole cause of the pay gap, prompting a deeper exploration into the complex factors influencing gender disparities in pay.

    • Closing the gender pay gapDespite progress in gender equality, the gender pay gap still exists. While discrimination may play a part, other factors such as work choices and productive attributes contribute to the gap. Addressing it requires a deeper understanding of these factors.

      The roles of men and women are becoming more similar in terms of education, professional degrees, and labor-force participation. This convergence in roles has led to increased similarities in how firms and employers view men and women, as well as how individuals perceive themselves. However, despite progress, there is still a gender pay gap, with women earning around 77 cents for every dollar men earn. While some may argue that this is due to discrimination, the evidence for direct discrimination is difficult to find. Instead, economists suggest that other factors, such as differences in productive attributes and work choices, contribute to the pay gap. Therefore, addressing the gender pay gap requires a deeper understanding of these underlying factors.

    • Exploring Wage Discrimination and Factors Influencing the Gender Pay GapAlthough wage discrimination based on gender exists, when considering various factors, the pay gap between men and women becomes relatively small. However, family responsibilities significantly impact women's career progression and earnings.

      While the term "discrimination" is not commonly used anymore, there is evidence of "wage discrimination" based on gender. However, this discrimination is not as prevalent as it may seem. When controlling for various factors, the pay gap between men and women becomes relatively small. Additionally, it is important to note that potential categorical differences between men and women, such as their appetite for competition or willingness to negotiate salaries, do contribute to the pay gap to some extent. However, these differences alone cannot fully account for the significant disparities in pay that are observed in later stages of individuals' careers. This suggests that factors related to family responsibilities, specifically after the birth of a child, have a significant impact on women's career progression and earnings.

    • The Gender Pay Gap and the Pursuit of FlexibilityThe desire for workplace flexibility often leads women to choose jobs with fewer opportunities for advancement, resulting in a gender pay gap.

      The pursuit of temporal flexibility plays a significant role in explaining the gender pay gap. Women who take on caregiving responsibilities for their children or other family members often need to work flexibly or part-time, which can result in less favorable assignments, lower raises, and fewer promotions. This desire for flexibility in the workplace leads to a clear division in job selection, with women often choosing jobs that offer more amenities such as flexible hours or the ability to work from home. Even if women and men start their careers on an equal footing, the need for flexibility can cause their paths to diverge, resulting in a gender pay gap.

    • Understanding the Gender Wage Gap: Occupational Segregation and Within-Occupation DisparitiesThe gender wage gap is not solely due to occupational segregation but also differences in pay within the same occupation, primarily caused by women working fewer hours or not conforming to preferred schedules.

      Women tend to earn less than men not just because they choose lower-paying occupations, but also because they face disparities within each occupation. While occupational segregation plays a role, with women often gravitating towards professions that offer more flexible working hours, the majority of the gender wage gap is caused by differences in pay within the same occupation. Women receive less than men primarily because they work fewer hours or fail to conform to the firm's preferred schedules. In fact, around 75% of the earnings disparity between men and women can be attributed to within-occupation differences. Even if women were to choose the same occupations as men, the gender pay gap would still persist to a significant degree.

    • Understanding the Reasons behind the Gender Pay GapThe gender wage gap is influenced by various factors, including occupational choices and preferences for flexibility. Discrimination, although present in some cases, is not the primary reason for the pay gap.

      The gender wage gap is not solely a result of discrimination or unequal pay for equal work. When examining different occupations, it becomes clear that the largest wage gaps exist in corporate, finance, law, and certain health professions where self-employment is prevalent. These high-paying roles often require significant temporal flexibility and dedication, which can conflict with family obligations or personal preferences. Women may choose to pursue careers that offer more flexibility, even if it means earning less. Therefore, the gender pay gap should be analyzed by considering various factors, such as occupation choice and the value placed on flexibility. While discrimination may still play a role in some cases, it does not seem to be the primary cause for the observed pay gap.

    • Addressing the Gender Pay Gap: Beyond DiscriminationCreating equal opportunities and empowering women to negotiate and advocate for themselves is crucial in closing the gender pay gap. It goes beyond eliminating bias and requires changing environments and systems.

      The gender pay gap goes beyond outright discrimination. Even in the absence of bias, women often face additional barriers that hinder their ability to negotiate and advocate for themselves. Jennifer Lawrence's experience in the film industry highlights the pressure women feel to be liked and not seem difficult when it comes to salary negotiations. Additionally, a study on blind auditions for orchestras found that the use of screens significantly increased the number of female applicants, suggesting that creating equal opportunities can lead to more women pursuing top-tier positions. This suggests that addressing the gender pay gap requires more than just eliminating discriminatory practices, but also creating environments and systems that empower and encourage women to pursue equal opportunities.

    • Understanding the Factors Influencing the Gender Pay GapBalancing personal choices and societal expectations is crucial in narrowing the gender pay gap. Examples from industries like pharmacy highlight the need for supportive work environments and challenging traditional gender roles for effective change.

      The gender pay gap is influenced by a combination of personal choices and societal structures. Women often make choices that lead to lower pay, such as opting for jobs with more flexibility to care for family or pursue personal interests. However, these choices are often not truly optional due to societal norms and expectations. To address the root causes of the gender pay gap, it may be important to look at successful examples, such as the pharmacy industry, where part-time work is not penalized and there is less ownership disparity. This suggests that creating more supportive work environments and challenging traditional gender roles can contribute to closing the pay gap. Offering discounts or symbolic gestures like the ones by M’lady’s Records and the Brooklyn bar may draw attention to the issue, but substantial change requires systemic shifts.

    • Creating Opportunities and Balance in the Pharmacy IndustryChanges in the pharmacy industry have provided more flexibility and growth opportunities for women. Improving aspects of the school system could help close the gender pay gap.

      Changes in the pharmacy industry have made it easier for women to pursue ownership and professional growth. Standardization and information technologies have allowed pharmacists to become interchangeable, reducing the need for a specific pharmacist to cater to individual customers. This has created more flexibility and opportunities for women in the field. Furthermore, the concept of work-life balance, rather than solely focusing on work-family balance, has gained importance in our society. As more individuals value this balance, firms are exploring ways to reduce the cost of providing family-friendly amenities. However, blaming men or institutional setups for the gender pay gap may not be the solution. Instead, improving aspects of the school system, such as extended hours and summer programs, could have a significant impact in closing the gap.

    • The Benefits of Extending the School Day and Year for Working FamiliesEncouraging men to take paternity leave and promote shared responsibility in caregiving can lead to a cultural shift that benefits both men and women.

      Extending the school day and year for children can greatly benefit working families. While it may come at a cost, this extension is an investment in our public good. However, simply legislating for more equal opportunities or temporal flexibility in firms is not an easy solution. Mandating that firms reduce the cost of temporal flexibility and become more accommodating is not practical. Instead, changes in social norms and encouraging men to take paternity leave can lead to a more balanced playing field. By promoting shared responsibility in caregiving, we can encourage a cultural shift that benefits both men and women. Ultimately, if men were to lean out more and take on greater caregiving responsibilities, it would create a better world for women.

    • Approaches for Achieving Gender Equity in the WorkplaceAddressing multiple factors such as improving women's skills, supporting childcare, changing societal expectations of men, and reforming organizational structures can create a more compassionate and productive society. Achieving complete sameness is not the goal, but promoting evidence-based policies for a better world is.

      Achieving gender equity in the workplace requires addressing multiple factors. Claudia Goldin suggests different approaches to tackle the issue, such as improving women's skills, supporting childcare, changing societal expectations of men, and reforming organizational structures. While there may be costs associated with pursuing gender equity, Goldin argues that the benefits outweigh them. Encouraging men to be more involved parents and treating women with respect in their jobs can create a more compassionate and productive society. However, she acknowledges that there will always be differences between men and women, and achieving complete sameness is not the goal. Despite the challenges, Goldin remains committed to doing better research and advocating for evidence-based policies that promote a better world for everyone.

    • The Hidden Gender Pay Gap: Unveiling Unconscious DiscriminationWomen must proactively negotiate their worth to ensure fair compensation and avoid unknowingly accepting lower pay compared to their male counterparts, even when performing the same task.

      Gender pay disparities can persist even in cases where discrimination isn't overtly visible in job positions or responsibilities. The narrative shared by economist Claudia Goldin highlights how women can unknowingly accept lower pay compared to their male counterparts, even when performing the same task. This scenario occurred when three consultants were hired to conduct an evaluation, and Goldin, assuming it was a favor, accepted a payment of $2,000. However, she later discovered that the two male consultants had negotiated higher rates and received one and a half to two times her payment. This incident demonstrates the importance of advocating for oneself and ensuring fair compensation by researching and quoting a previously agreed-upon rate rather than allowing organizations to determine pay arbitrarily. It serves as a reminder of the ongoing need for gender pay equality and the need for individuals to be proactive in negotiating their worth.

    Was this summary helpful?

    Recent Episodes from Freakonomics Radio

    605. What Do People Do All Day?

    605. What Do People Do All Day?

    Sixty percent of the jobs that Americans do today didn’t exist in 1940. What happens as our labor becomes more technical and less physical? And what kinds of jobs will exist in the future? 

     

    • SOURCES:

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usOctober 03, 2024

    EXTRA: Roland Fryer Refuses to Lie to Black America (Update)

    EXTRA: Roland Fryer Refuses to Lie to Black America (Update)

    His research on police brutality and school incentives won him acclaim, but also enemies. He was suspended for two years by Harvard, during which time he took a hard look at corporate diversity programs. As a follow-up to our recent series on the Rooney Rule, we revisit our 2022 conversation with the controversial economist.

     

    • SOURCE:

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 30, 2024

    604. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 2)

    604. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 2)

    What happened when the Rooney Rule made its way from pro football to corporate America? Some progress, some backsliding, and a lot of controversy. (Second in a two-part series.)

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 26, 2024

    603. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 1)

    603. Did the N.F.L. Solve Diversity Hiring? (Part 1)

    The biggest sports league in history had a problem: While most of its players were Black, almost none of its head coaches were. So the N.F.L. launched a hiring policy called the Rooney Rule. In the first episode of a two-part series, we look at how the rule succeeded — until it failed.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 19, 2024

    EXTRA: In Praise of Maintenance (Update)

    EXTRA: In Praise of Maintenance (Update)

    We revisit an episode from 2016 that asks: Has our culture’s obsession with innovation led us to neglect the fact that things also need to be taken care of? 

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Martin Casado, general partner at Andreessen Horowitz.
      • Ruth Schwartz Cowan, professor emerita of history and sociology of science at University of Pennsylvania.
      • Edward Glaeser, professor of economics at Harvard University.
      • Chris Lacinak, founder and president of AVPreserve.
      • Andrew Russell, provost of SUNY Polytechnic Institute.
      • Lawrence Summers, professor and president emeritus of Harvard University; former Secretary of the Treasury and former director of the National Economic Council.
      • Lee Vinsel, professor of science, technology, and society at Virginia Tech.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 16, 2024

    602. Is Screen Time as Poisonous as We Think?

    602. Is Screen Time as Poisonous as We Think?

    Young people have been reporting a sharp rise in anxiety and depression. This maps neatly onto the global rise of the smartphone. Some researchers are convinced that one is causing the other. But how strong is the evidence?

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 12, 2024

    601. Multitasking Doesn’t Work. So Why Do We Keep Trying?

    601. Multitasking Doesn’t Work. So Why Do We Keep Trying?

    Only a tiny number of “supertaskers” are capable of doing two things at once. The rest of us are just making ourselves miserable, and less productive. How can we put the — hang on a second, I've just got to get this.


    Come see Stephen Dubner live! 

    “A Questionable Evening: A strategic interrogation from two people who ask questions for a living,” featuring Stephen Dubner and PJ Vogt from Search Engine.

    Thursday, Sept. 26th, at the Bell House in Brooklyn, NY. 

    https://www.eventbrite.com/e/a-questionable-evening-evening-with-stephen-dubner-and-pj-vogt-tickets-1002544747327

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Olivia Grace, senior product manager at Slack.
      • Gloria Mark, professor of computer science at the University of California, Irvine.
      • David Strayer, professor of cognition and neural science at the University of Utah.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usSeptember 05, 2024

    What Is the Future of College — and Does It Have Room for Men? (Update)

    What Is the Future of College — and Does It Have Room for Men? (Update)

    Educators and economists tell us all the reasons college enrollment has been dropping, especially for men, and how to stop the bleeding. (Part 3 of our series from 2022, “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Zachary Bleemer, assistant professor of economics at Princeton University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • D'Wayne Edwards, founder and President of Pensole Lewis College.
      • Catharine Hill, former president of Vassar College; trustee at Yale University; and managing director at Ithaka S+R.
      • Pano Kanelos, founding president of the University of Austin.
      • Amalia Miller, professor of economics at the University of Virginia.
      • Donald Ruff, president and C.E.O. of the Eagle Academy Foundation.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Ruth Simmons, former president of Smith College, Brown University, and Prairie View A&M University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 29, 2024

    EXTRA: Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It

    EXTRA: Why Quitting Is Usually Worth It

    Stephen Dubner appears as a guest on Fail Better, a new podcast hosted by David Duchovny. The two of them trade stories about failure, and ponder the lessons that success could never teach.

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 26, 2024

    The University of Impossible-to-Get-Into (Update)

    The University of Impossible-to-Get-Into (Update)

    America’s top colleges are facing record demand. So why don’t they increase supply? (Part 2 of our series from 2022, “Freakonomics Radio Goes Back to School.”)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Peter Blair, professor of education at Harvard University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • Zachary Bleemer, assistant professor of economics at Princeton University and faculty research fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research.
      • Amalia Miller, professor of economics at the University of Virginia.
      • Morton Schapiro, professor of economics and former president of Northwestern University.
      • Miguel Urquiola, professor of economics at Columbia University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usAugust 22, 2024

    Related Episodes

    Can We Trust Insurance Companies With Big Data?

    Can We Trust Insurance Companies With Big Data?

    Insurance. No one likes it. No one really wants it. We definitely hate paying for it. And why wouldn’t we? Insurance companies are notorious for not wanting to pay out any money on a claim and sometimes dropping people if they do successfully collect on one. After all, insurance companies aren’t really about protecting you, they’re about making money. As the sniveling weasel in The Incredibles put it, “What about our shareholders? Who’s looking out for them, huh?” 

    As one would expect, insurance companies are always looking to cut their costs. For that, they have turned to data collection and analysis. TARTLE is of course big on data and what we can learn from it. However, we are not fans of the way insurance companies and pretty much everyone else tends to make use of third party data for their purposes. Not only is the sourcing of the data unethical in itself, it can also wind up being discriminatory. Not intentionally, sometimes assumptions are made that are written into the algorithms that analyze the data. Those assumptions may seem like no big deal at first, but they can be processed in such a way that they exclude far more people than intended, people that seem to fit a given profile but in the end differ in certain important ways the algorithm isn’t meant to look for. That’s one of the dangers of completely automating everything. When an AI is running the show, it doesn’t care about any programmed biases, it just does what it is told and does it completely ruthlessly. That is why Connecticut recently reminded insurers in the tiny state that they need to be careful to avoid any sort of discrimination in their use of data. Easier said than done.

    To illustrate that, let’s say the insurance company offered a discount to anyone who linked a Whoop or a Fitbit to their insurance account. That might seem innocuous. Certainly, they are sourcing data in a better than normal way since people have to opt in to share it. However, those things on your wrist cost money. Money that not everyone might be able to afford. Just a Whoop subscription runs around $30 a month. How many people are going to be paying that so they can opt into a discount program? Not many, especially since that discount will probably not defray the costs of the subscription. 

    On one hand, it seems perfectly reasonable to grant a discount to people who are willing to share more of their health data. Why wouldn’t an insurance company want to incentivize that behavior? Of course, they would. On the other hand, not everyone can afford it, as stated above. Which makes this a case of exclusion based on economics. Intentional? Probably not. Not too many people actually wake up in the morning and ask themselves how they can screw over poor people today. Not even people working for an insurance company. 

    So, what is the solution? How can an insurance company reward customers for sharing their health data without excluding those who can’t afford the necessary devices? TARTLE has exactly the right solution. We offer these companies the chance to reach out directly to their customers. The company can ask its customers on TARTLE to share whatever data they would like and when someone chooses to do so, the company simply pays the person for the data. That is something that virtually anyone can take advantage of. Yes, there are people who can’t afford any sort of device to work with TARTLE on, but if we are being honest, they don’t have insurance anyway. The solutions to that problem are on a whole other level (though there are other ways other organizations can use us to tackle that one). What we offer is the chance for insurance and other companies to interact directly with their customers to get the information they need and for those people to be incentivized. It’s a win/win scenario for everyone willing to take advantage of it.

    What’s your data worth? www.tartle.co

     

    Tcast is brought to you by TARTLE. A global personal data marketplace that allows users to sell their personal information anonymously when they want to, while allowing buyers to access clean ready to analyze data sets on digital identities from all across the globe.

     


    The show is hosted by Co-Founder and Source Data Pioneer Alexander McCaig and Head of Conscious Marketing Jason Rigby.

     


    What's your data worth?

     


    Find out at: https://tartle.co/

     


    YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TARTLE

     


    Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TARTLEofficial/

     


    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tartle_official/

     


    Twitter: https://twitter.com/TARTLEofficial

     


    Spread the word!

    Real Artificial Intelligence Biases

    Real Artificial Intelligence Biases

    Chuck Nice and Sean Donnelly visit friends and talk about real biases with AI, Breonna Taylor, and how liberal hollywood is anything but liberal with host Marina Franklin

    Sean Donnelly: ​​When he’s not catching a nap with his bulldog, Rickles, Sean can be found headlining clubs and festivals all over the country. He has appeared on The Late Show with David Letterman, Conan and NBC’s Last Comic Standing. Sean co-hosts the podcast My Dumb Friends with fellow comedian Dan St. Germain on the All Things Comedy network. He released his debut comedy album “Manual Labor Face” in 2015 on Comedy Central Records. Sean has been featured on the truTV series World’s Dumbest and Almost Genius as well as Adam Devine’s House Party, The Half Hour, Broad City, and Inside Amy Schumer on Comedy Central, Amazon’s Alpha House, GSN’s Lie Detectors, Limitless on CBS, and Billions on Showtime.

    Chuck Nice: Chuck Nice is a Philadelphia native and a 18 year veteran of stand up comedy with a rich history in television and radio. For eight years he provided comic relief to the Radio Chick show, bringing the funny to New York’s radio air waves. From that time until present, Chuck has been equally busy making a name for himself on the small screen. He is the host of Buy Like A Mega Millionaire on HGTV, The Juice on Veria Living and The Hot Ten on Centric. Chuck is seen regularly on the Today Show, has guest hosted Joy Behar’s Say Anything and Co-hosted The View. Chuck maintains his radio presence as the co-host of Star Talk Radio with Dr. Neil Degrasse Tyson where he provides humorous commentary on one his favorite subjects...science. He’s the host of ‘Brain Games: On The Road’ on Disney+ -  In each episode, host Chuck Nice and show pits two neighborly teams of 4 players against each other in a series of entertaining games designed for endless at home play-along and breezy Brainiac takeaway.

    Always hosted by Marina Franklin - One Hour Comedy Special: Single Black Female ( Amazon Prime, CW Network), TBS's The Last O.G, Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, Hysterical on FX, The Movie Trainwreck, Louie Season V, The Jim Gaffigan Show, Conan O'Brien, Stephen Colbert, HBO's Crashing, and The Breaks with Michelle Wolf

    3: Women @ Work (1): Challenges Faced by Professional Women in the Workplace: Part 1

    3: Women @ Work (1): Challenges Faced by Professional Women in the Workplace: Part 1

    During this episode, I share my personal journey to understand, come to terms with, and finally stand by and up for women who face bias in the workplace. In 2020, professional women still struggle to be recognized and valued in the workplace.  They silence their voices not because of weakness or fear, but because many highly successful professional women work in traditionally male-dominated contexts, where there is little actual interest in the challenges women face in the workplace when it comes to diversity and inclusion.  The stories in this episode intend to give voice to some compelling and jaw-dropping stories about women facing real issues related to equity at work.   

    US Soccer to Close Gender Pay Gap and Contact Lenses Treat Glaucoma

    US Soccer to Close Gender Pay Gap and Contact Lenses Treat Glaucoma

    Today's good news: Arielle and Kristy discuss the exciting med-tech advancement involving contact lenses that release glaucoma treatments, then they celebrate how US Soccer and both the men's and women's national teams have come to a historic collective bargaining agreement to finally close the gender pay gap.

    If you'd like to lend your voice to the Optimist Daily Update, send an email to: editorial@optimistdaily.com.

    Listen to the Optimist Daily Update with Summers & Kristy - Making Solutions the News!

    Logo

    © 2024 Podcastworld. All rights reserved

    Company

    Pricing

    Stay up to date

    For any inquiries, please email us at hello@podcastworld.io