Equal Pay...But Not Here...

[Danoh]

Iceland may become first to require proof of equal pay for women

By Doug G. Ware
April 5, 2017 at 4:11 PM

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...re-proof-of-equal-pay-for-women/5171491412859

April 5 (UPI) -- Iceland is considering a proposal that would make it the first country in the world to require proof from employers that they are paying men and women equally.

Lawmakers in Reykjavik are weighing the legislation, which was introduced Tuesday. It mandates that companies with more than two dozen employees be certified by the Icelandic government that there are no discrepancies in the way they pay women and men for similar work.

If passed, the bill would make the certification requirement retroactive to the beginning of this year.

Iceland is one of the world's leading countries in paying men and women equally. It ranked first in the World Economic Forum's Global Gender Gap Index for 2015, the most recent rating. The United States ranked 28th.

http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2015/rankings/

"For decades, we've said we're going to fix this," Frida Ros Valdimarsdottir, chairwoman of the Icelandic Women's Rights Association, said last month. "But women are still getting lower pay, and that's insane."

There is some opposition to the proposed law in parliament -- primarily due to the belief that Iceland has already demonstrated that it is paying employees equally, making such a legal requirement unnecessary.

"We have to be smart in that, when such burdensome and costly regulations are subject to the people of the country, there is an existing problem," Icelandic MP Brynjar Níelsson said Wednesday. "In other words, the problem to be solved must be present."

If companies fail to provide documentation proving equal pay, they would face potential penalties from the government.

 

[ok doser]

define "similar work"

 

[Ktoyou]

The big factor is the time of beginning work. If you work at a fast food counter, or if you are and engineer, or lawyer for that matter. You begin as an entry level position, then over time, you advance.

Now, when one leaves a job, then they have to reenter a new career, and it is like starting over to some extent.

An accountant starting work in 1980 has put in more hours into the company one works for, than someone who started work in 1980, then took off a few years, then went back to work in 1985 and then takes a leave a few years later, then begins working at a new company in 1990.

Sure, one gets some credit for past experience, but it is not the same as keeping a job since 1980 until retirement.

This is the main reason why men usually receive higher pay for the same work, say accountant. One, after working five years, may become chief accountant in the department and that brings a higher salary. One cannot begin a new job and be promoted solely on past work history, it does not work that way. You have to put in continuous time to get the high salary.

 

[kmoney]

The big factor is the time of beginning work. If you work at a fast food counter, or if you are and engineer, or lawyer for that matter. You begin as an entry level position, then over time, you advance.

Now, when one leaves a job, then they have to reenter a new career, and it is like starting over to some extent.

An accountant starting work in 1980 has put in more hours into the company one works for, than someone who started work in 1980, then took off a few years, then went back to work in 1985 and then takes a leave a few years later, then begins working at a new company in 1990.

Sure, one gets some credit for past experience, but it is not the same as keeping a job since 1980 until retirement.

This is the main reason why men usually receive higher pay for the same work, say accountant. One, after working five years, may become chief accountant in the department and that brings a higher salary. One cannot begin a new job and be promoted solely on past work history, it does not work that way. You have to put in continuous time to get the high salary.

I don't see why that can't be taken into account in 'similar work'.