How is the data gathered for the Men Make More Than Women theory?

Do they take a bunch of men and women, and find the mean? Do they take men and women in the same companies and find the mean and then find the mean of all the different groups of companies? How exactly do they gather and analyze the data to come to the conclusion that Men make more than Women?How is the data gathered for the Men Make More Than Women theory?
Sometimes the same jobs, same education are compared. Sometimes the same jobs tasks (different job titles), same education are compared, using US Census data. Then they're all lumped together and averaged. Many people point out that men and women are paid differently because of differences in work experience and because of the occupations that men and women choose, but here's a few other factors that affect pay equity:





Recently, the American Association of University Women studied what happened when male and female college graduates were offered jobs (so they had the same educational and work experience, the two excuses used for differences in wages between US men and women), women were offered less pay then men, even when men and women had the exact same major. Even with this type of proof, guess what happened? Women were blamed for not ';negotiating'; as well as men. Let's face it, there is gender discrimination in pay, whether we like it or not. Corporations can get away with it, so what's to stop them?:


http://www.aauw.org/newsroom/pressreleas鈥?/a>





A recent CNN Money article quoted two recent studies providing information about the bias in hiring and wages women with children face, and what happens when women DO negotiate for a job: http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/21/commenta鈥?/a>





* A recent Cornell study found that female job applicants with children would be less likely to get hired, and if they do, would be paid a lower salary than other candidates, male and female. By contrast, male applicants with children would be offered a higher salary than non-fathers and other mothers.





* A recent Carnegie Mellon study found that female job applicants who tried to negotiate a higher salary were less likely to be hired by male managers, while male applicants were not.: http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/03/commenta鈥?/a>





The CNN Money article does point out the reasons some women are paid less (part time work, leaving the work force to care for children, type of major), but even then, ';those factors account for a good portion of the wage gap, *actual pay discrimination* likely accounts for the balance';, experts say.





Hartmann believes discrimination accounts for between 25 percent and 33 percent of the wage gap. Compensation specialist Gary Thornton, a principal in the HR management consulting firm Thornton %26amp; Associates, figures at least 10 percent to 15 percent does.';





Yes, women do leave the workforce since it is not flexible for women to care for their children-but this actually affects less and less women, since how many women can afford not to work? Even so, if women were paid fairly, then men would have the same opportunities to raise their children, since either gender would be paid the same.





Many studies have proved that women face a huge hardship when they DO try to return to work, after taking care of their children. Many women end up with part-time work not because they want it, but that's all they could get:


http://www.cjr.org/essay/the_optout_myth鈥?/a>





Yes, some women are choosing professions that are not as highly paid (like education) as ones that men choose, but even when a profession is highly paid, if a number of women get into it, the pay actually decreases. From the CNN Money article about the gender wage gap:





';Then there's the phenomenon of wages going down when more women move into a field. Take human resources, now a female-dominated profession. The author asked an HR professional, Thornton if he thinks female human-resource managers today are paid as well as he and his male colleagues were 15 years ago. ';Not at all,'; he said. He estimates that in inflation-adjusted terms they're paid about 20 percent less. Why? ';That's the million-dollar question,'; he said. ';There are many things at play. But we still have a long way to go to change unintentional discrimination.';


http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/21/commenta鈥?/a>





FYI: Often William Ferrell is quoted as a wage gap expert, since he has written a number of books on the wage gap for the men's movement based on his interpretations of US Census statistics. Unfortunately, other researchers and economists have not interpreted the US Census statistics like Ferrell has, in addition, of researchers who've examined his work, they said he did not perform his statistical analysis correctly.





Good luck!How is the data gathered for the Men Make More Than Women theory?
They take the median salaries of all men and women who work full time (defined as at least 40 hours of labor a week).





They use the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics to do so (I'm assuming you are a United States citizen, of course. The same could probably be said for StatisticsCanada or another organization as applicable).





The question then becomes, is that really an accurate measure of how much men and women are payed, or do other factors affect the results?
I have heard this one more often than not. Many, not all women make less than men. Why? In the back of there head they know most women do have or will have children. They take there allotted maternity leave. They will take more days off to tend to the kids. I am not saying this is right, but many cases it is. Sometimes others in the office must take up this slack and they do not like it.
The question behind the question is:


';Is it valid';.





The pay has to be reported to the government - through taxes. The IRS gives that data without names, just with official job codes and revenue numbers, and genders, to the Department of Labor Statistics. They chew through all the data to come up with the inequity.





You dont know how offensive your question sounds. Let me translate it into guy for you.





Imagine you were walking down the street, were yanked into the alley, had the crap kicked out of you, and your wallet, keys, and jewelry taken forcefully from you - you were mugged. So then imagine you going to the police to report the crime, and you are bleeding seriously, and hurt, and just robbed. When you get there the female officer on duty looks at you and says ';you are a guy, right?'; You say ';yes';. The officer says, guys are bigger than women, and tend to be stronger, there is no way you were mugged. Get out of here or you will be put in jail. How would you feel hearing that?





Thats what a woman feels. The first crime committed is that she is given less for the same or better work. Thats a crime. If it happened to you, you would be mad or feel contempted. The second crime is that when she reports it, her report is invalidated. You say ';because it doesnt happen to me, it cant happen to you';. Thats just ignorance talking.





I dare you, I double-dare you, to go talk to a female professor in a tough science field. Pick something guy dominated like civil engineering and then talk to her. Here is the question I want you to ask her, and listen to what she has to say. Tell her ';Please enable me to participatively experience what it has been like to work as a woman in a male dominated field';. Dont say ';pay inequity'; or ';sexual harrassment';. Dont give her leading words, just let her answer the question. Look deep in her eyes, and understand how she feels about it.





After you have understood what it is like to be treated less when in truth you are as good or better, and that only on the basis of gender.. then you can come to a forum like this and ask a question like this.
O.K. The question of whether or not the statistic is valid is a valid question. For instance, I work in PR. PR is a majority female business. Most of the top ten percent pay wise are men. I hear this stat all of the time. Discrimination?! No. The guys who get paid the most have been doing it the longest. With women's lib happening in earnest really in the 80's, (i know it started much earlier but didn't really have dramatic effects on the work place till this time) most of the long-timers are men. Give it time. If this stat remains unchanged in another 20 years then it may be valid. Until then, we should stick with comparing salaries for men and women who work in the same company and have the same years of experience and the same education. If we went back and did the research again that way, I am certain the stats would look much different. Until that research is done and filed the statistic is bunk. (now bring on the hate ladies)
Why don't you write to the U.S. Census Bureau and/or various professors who have published such studies and find out.