What if Kim Kardashian is smart as scientists!

They just want to save money on their payroll.

Interesting advert and certainly laudable goals. But also a clever PR move.

So an article from the Business Insider states that GE currently employs 14,700 women – making women 18% of its workforce. By 2020 as a ‘commitment to close the gender gap at its organization’ GE promises ‘to place 20,000 women in technical roles by 2020’. So that is roughly what a 7% increase? Basically in three years’ time they hope to go from 18% to 25% of their workforce being women. Not a bad start. Still 20,000 women sounds better than a 7% increase. That said (now my curiosity kicked in) apparently ‘Women make up only about one-quarter (25.8%) of those in STEM occupations in 2016’ and 25% is about right for post graduate degrees so GE seems to be on track to keep pace with Uni graduates. So I guess closing the gender gap will take some time ;-) Kudos to GE – gotta start somewhere.

> 2. snotraddict 'They just want to save money on their payroll.'

A painful LOL. It is painfully amusing because it could be true if new hires aren’t vigilant about verifying pay equality. And actually not funny but sadly serious because in 2017 women still on average earn less for doing the exact same job as their equally qualified male counterparts.

http://www.businessinsider.com/ge-commits-to-placing-20000-women-in-technical-roles-by-2020-2017-2?r=UK&IR=T

#5 "And actually not funny but sadly serious because in 2017 women still on average earn less for doing the exact same job as their equally qualified male counterparts."

Not true.
Ben Frost, a global reward expert at Hay Group, said: “When it comes to thinking about pay on the basis of gender, a man and a woman in the same company, doing the same job, will usually be paid nearly the same. The data shows this very consistently, from Sweden to South Africa. This means we need to look at the pay gap differently. The biggest driver is a lack of women in high-paying industries, senior functions and in leadership positions. If we want to close the pay gap and make a difference, it is the road to the top jobs that needs to be the focus. This is the pay gap problem.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/11/gender-pay-gap-does-not-exist-between-men-and-women-doing-the-sa/

# 4. psyh ‘Not true.’

Thanks for the link! Much appreciated. Now we have something to talk about ;-)

I will however respectfully disagree with your statement on a number of grounds.

First, let’s look at the source of this story – the Telegraph. This is a conservative broadsheet by its editorial page identification and pro-business so rebutting what is an empirical fact reached in a number of proper studies (more below) is not surprising. In reading the story some hints of the ideological slant were immediately apparent IMHO.
So this title claiming a gap doesn’t exist flies in the face of many many studies. ‘ A gender pay gap between men and women who do the same job does not exist, according to a report which also found the "glass ceiling" is the real reason why women receive smaller pay packets than men.

So it is sexism (i.e. the glass ceiling) and not deliberate wage inequality? How does one tease those apart?

The it goes on ‘The study, by human resources firm Hay Group, analysed over 8 million workers in 33 different countries and found that women working in the same job function and at the same level within UK firms, on average are paid just 0.8pc less than their male equivalents’

Great. But at no time are we linked to the Hay Group study and allowed to review its methodology. So now I am suspicious. Interestingly some of the hyperlinks in the story you cite also have some more very ideologically revealing headlines.

‘The gender pay gap might be unfair, but it's not the fault of 'sexist' employers
The gender pay gap – such as it exists at all – simply reflects society and the different choices different people make

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/12153967/The-gender-pay-gap-might-be-unfair-but-its-not-the-fault-of-sexist-employers.html

What? This is the standard conservative response ‘reflects society and the different choices different people make’ and while it may have been used to justify gender inequality in the 1960’2, 70’s and such – no modern nation accepts this. Times and laws and the roles of women have changed.

Another hyperlink in the story goes to this which contradicts the Hay Group study – this time using gov’t data
Gender pay gap league tables to 'name and shame' companies (12:01AM GMT 12 Feb 2016)

Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary and equalities minister, announces plans to publish league tables of the gender pay gap of all companies with over 250 employees.

And ‘women on average still earn 19.1 per cent less than men - equivalent to 80p for every pound earned by a man. In the finance and insurance sector the pay gap is 39.5 per cent..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/12152946/gender-pay-gap-league-tables-name-shame-companies.html

And back to my concern over the source, the Telegraph. For a more empirical and accurate assessment of the gender pay situation I went to the IMF website. They do numbers and research properly. And look they have a dedicated page.

Gender and IMF http://www.imf.org/external/themes/gender/

And the conclusion reached by IMF researchers is ‘The gender wage gap is roughly 16% in OECD countries.’

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2017/03/picture.htm

So, respectfully, I think it is true. One should always look for the most methodologically transparent and rigours studies and sources possible and conservative UK broadsheets and ‘studies by X’ with zero ability to look at how the result was achieved fails this test. But sadly passes for acceptable journalism.

I have to admit I LOVE a woman with a brain. How about a tall(ish), slim, drop dead gorgeous, blue eyed, red head with a peaches and cream complexion...who just happens to be training to be a Mathematical Physicist?

Sorry guys...she's already married and has a gorgeous little girl ( also a red head ! )...besides...she's my niece :-)

#6 Not sure if you should be talking about her like that lol