Home>Articles>In Gender ‘Neutral’ California, Why Mandate Equal Pay for Women?

First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom. (Photo: Kevin Sanders for California Globe)

In Gender ‘Neutral’ California, Why Mandate Equal Pay for Women?

On the issue of equal pay, it was in Democrat politicians’ offices in the California Legislature where women were paid less than their male counterparts

By Katy Grimes, October 27, 2022 3:56 pm

In gender “neutral” California, why mandate equal pay for women, as First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom is advocating?

For that matter, in gender “neutral” California, why mandate more women on boards? That is the question we asked in 2019 when the California Legislature passed a bill to require large corporations with base operations in California to put more female directors on their boards. Judicial Watch quickly filed a lawsuit and reported:

SB 826 is illegal under the California Constitution. The legislation’s quota system for female representation on corporate boards employs express gender classifications. As a result, SB 826 is immediately suspect and presumptively invalid and triggers strict scrutiny review.

California First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom just “applauded LinkedIn for becoming the latest company to sign California’s Equal Pay Pledge.”

Why would Linkedin do this if gender is neutral in California.

Or, for that matter, what about trans-women, who were “assigned male at birth?” Do trans-women receive less pay than their cis-gender male coworkers?

The California Commission on the Status of Women and Girls explains:

“By signing the pledge, the company has committed to conduct an annual company-wide gender pay analysis, review LinkedIn’s hiring and promotion processes and procedures to reduce unconscious bias and structural barriers, and promote best practices to help close the pay gap and ensure fundamental equity for all workers.”

On the issue of equal pay, it’s often in Democrat politicians’ offices where women are paid less than their male counterparts, especially in the California Legislature.

In 2015, it was the Sacramento Bee, and not the California Legislative Women’s Caucus or the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls that analyzed the Legislature’s own payroll finding significant wage gaps between the 2,100 men and women employees of the Legislature. Here’s what was revealed:

▪ In the Assembly, women made 92 cents on the dollar compared to men. In the Senate, women make 94 cents on the dollar compared to men.

▪ In both houses, the five highest-paid employees are men. Among the 41 employees across both houses who make $150,000 or more, 61 percent of the positions are held by men.

▪ Within specific job categories, the average pay for men and women is rarely equal. In higher-paid categories – such as chief of staff or chief consultant – men, on average, make more than women with the same title.

▪ When women make more than men with the same job title, it tends to be in lower-paid job categories, such as executive secretary or committee assistant – positions that are dominated by female employees.

Oops.

This forced the California Senate in 2017 to give 10 percent raises to 71 employees to shrink the gender pay gap.

What’s the goal of the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls?

“The Commission on the Status of Women and Girls works in a culturally inclusive manner to promote equality and justice for all women and girls by advocating on their behalf with the Governor, the Legislature and other public policymakers, and by educating the public in the areas of economic equity and other key issue areas identified by the Commission as significantly affecting women and girls.”

The Commission claims:

For the past 50 years, the Commission has been present and involved in state and national debates and social movements, advocating to better the lives of women and girls everywhere.

Where was the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls in 2015 when it was revealed that their own Party and lawmakers were shortchanging female employees in the State Capitol.

As for the old lie that women are paid less than men, as Economist Thomas Sowell says, “like many other politically successful lies, it contains just enough of the truth to fool the gullible.”

“Women as a group do get paid less than men as a group,” Sowell says. “But not for doing the same work. Women average fewer annual hours of work than men. They work continuously for fewer years than men, since only women get pregnant, and most women are not prepared to instantly dump the baby on somebody else to raise.”

The First Partner should interview Thomas Sowell for her next documentary before signing on to another fake injustice by feminist grievance hustlers. Sowell explains why:

“Many studies have been done over many years — and they repeatedly show that women and men who work the very same hours in the very same jobs at the very same levels of skill and experience do not have the pay gaps.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Spread the news:

 RELATED ARTICLES

9 thoughts on “In Gender ‘Neutral’ California, Why Mandate Equal Pay for Women?

  1. LOVED seeing the symbolic nonsense from “First Partner” Jennifer Seibel-Newsom and our own state legislature (“do as I say not as I do”) blown to smithereens this way. No kidding, “oops”!

    “The First Partner should interview Thomas Sowell for her next documentary before signing on to another fake injustice by feminist grievance hustlers. Sowell explains why:
    “‘Many studies have been done over many years — and they repeatedly show that women and men who work the very same hours in the very same jobs at the very same levels of skill and experience do not have the pay gaps.'”
    Oops!

      1. Ha ha! Yes, it probably should be, Fed Up. Personally I’ve always been kinda partial to “First Wifey.” 🙂

  2. Oh look, it’s the “First Partner”(another Newsom narcissistic act) – wasn’t she the one who willingly jumped on Harvey Weinstein’s casting couch, then went back to him for advice on how to handle Gavin’s affair with his friend’s wife???
    And yet this power and prestige-seeking bimbo went ahead and married Newsom anyways???
    THAT “First Partner”???

  3. After her shenanigans with Harvey Weinstein, how can anyone take First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom seriously?

    1. Diana Ross and the Supremes likely have a good understanding of what a woman is. A particular Supreme Court Justice clearly does not. That Supreme Court Justice goes by the pronoun “they”, or is it “it”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.