kfl@AI.AI.MIT.EDU (01/05/87)
From: ~joe testa~ <testa-j%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA>
... if women work just as hard as men, and are willing to work
for a lower salary than men, then a company which
discriminates against women is at a strong competitive
disadvantage ...
... How 'bout putting it another way: "if women work just as hard
as men, and must settle for jobs at a lower salary than men, then
a company }i which will not hire women is at a strong competitive
disadvantage."
I think this more accurately reflects what really happens.
You distinguish between "willing to work for" and "must settle for".
I don't see the distinction.
Can I say that I am NOT willing to work for less that one million
dollars a year but I must settle for a salary which is much less?
Does that distiction make any sense, given that I obviously AM willing
to work for the lower salary since I am in fact doing so?
But this is beside the point. The point is that salaries are
decided by the mutual consent of employee and employer, and there is
no justification for any third party to limit the free choices made by
free individuals. If it were forbidden to hire women for less than
men make, many women would become unemployed.
...Keith
-------