seeker@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Karen Lynn White) (07/07/88)
Have you ever been in a situation where you just wonder if you are
treated differently for being female? How can you really be sure
that some situations are discriminatory?
I just began working a part-time job that I'll keep in my last year
of school. The work (system programming mostly) is fun and very
low-pressure. They gave me a great terminal, light, desk and other
stuff students never get. I get to come in whenever I want and
work as many or as few hours as I want. They don't have a lot
of fun toys to play with yet but I like the people and it is fun to
be involved in setting up a new environment.
The job is great, even if I am the only female at this location
who is not a secretary. The only problem I have with the situation
is that they paid the guy I replaced $1.5 more an hour than I get.
He worked there about 10 months and did not get a raise during that
time. His GPA is about the same as mine and also hired in as a
senior. The main difference is that he was majoring in 'decision
science' and I am working on an honor's BA in cs and math.
When they initally made an offer I tryed to get it set up a little
but was told that you have to take or leave whatever number
comes out of their formula. I was also told I could my job title
would have to be 'staff assistant' until I graduate although I am
getting to program, same as any of the others. The number I was
given was GS-5 which seems to mean some range to military types.
This title and number were the same for the guy I'm replacing so
that doesn't explain the difference in money.
Can anybody tell me what GS-5 means and what the salary range for
it can be? Should I just be happy I have a job good or at some
point am I justified in asking for a little more money?
I should say what I'm paid may be fair but I did make more money
per hour the summer before with less experience.
I'm bringing this up for advice but also because I wonder if a
lot of women find a place to work where they can pick up
kids or work flex-time without hassle and then stay there
when the money could be much better somewhere else. Is it
common to settle for fewer benefits in a comfortable place to work?
Karen Lynn White "On a clear disk you can seek forever..."
Computer Science
Indiana University ARPA: seeker@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu
Bloomington, IN 47405 UUCP: {pyramid,ihnp4,pur-ee,rutgers}!iuvax!seekerdlsc1032@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Alan Beal) (07/07/88)
In article <11732@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, seeker@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Karen Lynn White) writes: > When they initally made an offer I tryed to get it set up a little > but was told that you have to take or leave whatever number > comes out of their formula. I was also told I could my job title > would have to be 'staff assistant' until I graduate although I am > getting to program, same as any of the others. The number I was > given was GS-5 which seems to mean some range to military types. > This title and number were the same for the guy I'm replacing so > that doesn't explain the difference in money. > > Can anybody tell me what GS-5 means and what the salary range for > it can be? Should I just be happy I have a job good or at some > point am I justified in asking for a little more money? It sounds like you are working for a government agency and if you are, you should know that most government employees are paid according to the General Schedule(GS) table of wages. My first impression is that you are lucky to get paid GS-5($15,118) wages since you did not have a degree and were justing starting out. I know a lot of college students working on a temporary basis as a GS-3($12,038). There are a lot of rules and regulations that the personnel offices apply in determining pay and grades so I would say that you are not being discriminated against but have instead been introduced to the bureaucratic methods of the government. You should also know that a government employee cannot get a raise(step increase) until that person has been in their present position for at least one year. Another thing you should be aware of is that pay within the government has little to do with experience, degrees, or effort. Instead it is just a matter of putting in your time and moving from job to job in order to get into a higher grade. I got quite a chuckle out of your comment of asking for more money. If you plan to stay with the government for any length of time, you should be aware of the fact that the government employees usually receive cost of living increases that are well below the rate of inflation. Last year we got a hefty 2% increase, the year before 0%, and the year before that 3%. I guess the only ones making a decent living working for government are the defense contractors. >From my experience I would say that the government is probably one of the fairest institutions in hiring women, minorities, the handicapped, and veterans. However, don't expect wages on the same scale on those in the private sector. Do expect a good retirement system, good leave(vacation) policies, and job security. I guess it is up to you where you place the most emphasis. -- Alan Beal DLSC-ZBC Autovon: 932-4160 FTS: 552-4160 Defense Logistics Services Center Phone: (616)961-4160 Battle Creek, MI 49017 Internet: abeal%dlscg2.uucp@daitc.arpa UUCP: {uunet!gould!dsacg1,osu-cis!dsacg1,eecae!dsacng1}!dlscg2!abeal
dbmt@brl-adm.arpa (Data Base Management Team ) (07/07/88)
GS Annual Payscale Grade Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Step 10 1 9811.00 10139.00 10465.00 10791.00 11117.00 11309.00 11631.00 11955.00 11970.00 12275.00 2 11032.00 11294.00 11659.00 11970.00 12103.00 12459.00 12815.00 13171.00 13527.00 13883.00 3 12038.00 12439.00 12840.00 13241.00 13642.00 14043.00 14444.00 14845.00 15246.00 15647.00 4 13513.00 13963.00 14413.00 14863.00 15313.00 15763.00 16213.00 16663.00 17113.00 17563.00 5 15118.00 15622.00 16126.00 16630.00 17134.00 17638.00 18142.00 18646.00 19150.00 19654.00 6 16851.00 17413.00 17975.00 18537.00 19099.00 19661.00 20223.00 20785.00 21347.00 21909.00 7 18726.00 19350.00 19974.00 20598.00 21222.00 21846.00 22470.00 23094.00 23718.00 24342.00 8 20739.00 21430.00 22121.00 22812.00 23503.00 24194.00 24885.00 25576.00 26267.00 26958.00 9 22907.00 23671.00 24435.00 25199.00 25963.00 26727.00 27491.00 28255.00 29019.00 29783.00 10 25226.00 26067.00 26908.00 27749.00 28590.00 29431.00 30272.00 31113.00 31954.00 32795.00 11 27716.00 28640.00 29564.00 30488.00 31412.00 32336.00 33260.00 34184.00 35108.00 36032.00 12 33218.00 34325.00 35432.00 36539.00 37646.00 38753.00 39860.00 40967.00 42074.00 43181.00 13 39501.00 40818.00 42135.00 43452.00 44769.00 46086.00 47403.00 48720.00 50037.00 51354.00 14 46679.00 48235.00 49791.00 51347.00 52903.00 54459.00 56015.00 57571.00 59127.00 60683.00 15 54907.00 56737.00 58567.00 60397.00 62227.00 64057.00 65887.00 67717.00 69547.00 71377.00 16 64397.00 66544.00 68691.00 70838.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 17 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 18 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00 72500.00
eliz@cs.rochester.edu (07/07/88)
Ms. White's letter really hit home: >From: seeker@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Karen Lynn White) >Message-ID: <11732@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> >Date: 6 Jul 88 20:48:20 GMT >Have you ever been in a situation where you just wonder if you are >treated differently for being female? How can you really be sure >that some situations are discriminatory? I've been in a bunch of situations that felt fishy to me (but then maybe I'm just insecure, heh, heh!). The most notable have been when I was on the admissions committee for my computer science department and the first pass turned up NO women in the exceptional category. There aren't huge numbers of women who meet our criteria yet, so it could just be statistical, but it seemed odd. When I found good applications and talked them up, we ended up making some offers to women and in fact got three fine ones. I have no specifics to point to, though. I also know that comparably qualified women faculty progress more slowly throught the pay scale here, and are less likely to get tenure, but again, no specifics. Obviously I should look into it. There is this committment issue with women. I don't know many women who are fanatical about their careers to the exclusion of love, family and sleep as a lot of these guys (I do know some.) I don't know whether we (I think I'm a non-fanatic) make up for it by doggedly picking away at the problem in each free moment. But I do know that it's hard to do good Artificial Intelligence research piecemeal. I wouldn't be surprised of one problem of the meritocracy is just that monolithic endeavors are valued more than a fine hand with detail. (compare to the philosophy of women's studies.) On to Karen: >The job is great, even if I am the only female at this location >who is not a secretary. The only problem I have with the situation >is that they paid the guy I replaced $1.5 more an hour than I get. >He worked there about 10 months and did not get a raise during that >time. His GPA is about the same as mine and also hired in as a >senior. The main difference is that he was majoring in 'decision >science' and I am working on an honor's BA in cs and math. It is your right (and no one should be offended) to ask exactly what the qualifications are for the higher pay grade, and also what the outgoing guy's qualifications were. Further, if they can't explain the discrepancy, then you should tell them that you deserve the higher rate too (you know, asserting at this point, not saying anything about gender or their intentions in classing you as they did. It may be honest error or oversight, and even if it wasn't the point is to get it straight.) I bet the student's major did not enter the calculation. >I'm bringing this up for advice but also because I wonder if a >lot of women find a place to work where they can pick up >kids or work flex-time without hassle and then stay there >when the money could be much better somewhere else. Is it >common to settle for fewer benefits in a comfortable place to work? Universities are generally more flexible and less pay than industry, it's true. Consulting should be the best of both, but I don't know any women consultants. Hmmmm... I tend to forget that money can buy other kinds of freedom. Like day care. (do I want to apply to Bloomington to teach AI, Karen?) Elizabeth Arpa: eliz@cs.rochester.edu (Elizabeth Hinkelman) UUCP: ...{rocksvax|allegra|decvax}!rochester!eliz USnail: Department of Computer Science, U. of Rochester, N.Y. 14627 phone: (716) 275 - 2527 (office)
ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) (07/08/88)
Federal Government salaries are based on GS series. Essentially this is a group of pay ranges that correspond to the "type/quality" of work you are doing. Within each GS level are steps. These are used to benefit workers who've worked in a particular job range with good performance. For non- incompetents, you're step increases are your annual range. If you want to go up a GS level, you need to have your position changed to reflect that you are actually working on the type of work that is classified at the higher GS level. There are some important things to note: 1. GS levels, say GS-5 step 1 in your case, are not constant accross all types of employees. For example, at BRL where I worked, Engineers at GS-9 were paid about $2000 more than Mathematicians. This is generally done to try to keep the government salaries competitive with outside industry (it still lags pretty badly, but you take what you can get). 2. There are some rather inflexible rules about who can qualify for various GS levels and job classes. You needed a BS degree in some engineering field to get the Engineering scale. Had I only had a Computer Science degree, I would have been on the Math scale and have made $2000 less for the same job. This is likely to be your problem. 3. The government is even more inflexible in what positions you can get if you don't have a degree at all. No amount of outside review that we tried could get my coworker who was as fine as a UNIX hacker as you'll ever see on a reasonable grade. As far as the OPM was concered, he couldn't possibly be doing GS-7 work, because he didn't have a degree. Some things for you to try. First, a batchelors degree should be good enough to get a GS-7 if you had good grades at school (better than 3.0 overall, or better than 3.5 in your major, or on the Deans list, either for the last two years of your coursework or for everything, whichever makes you look the best). You might explore bumping up a grade level. I doubt that for starting salaries sex plays much of a role. It is when promotion time comes that the oppurtunity to not provide the necessary recommendations comes into play. Of course, as near as I can tell, the Army at least, goes overboard in providing Equal Oppurtunity coordinators to try to avoid these things. A final piece of advice. Find out what the promotion rules are for your job. You may be eligible for one as soon as 6 months after you start. Your boss may either not be knowledgeable of the oppurtunities for your advancement or he may be a bit of a procrastinator with regard to putting in for them. My boss was very good at keeping track of our stuff, but I know some people who suffered, because their boss just never got around to applying for their raises. -Ron
maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) (07/08/88)
Karen, If what you describe is true, you should ask your personnel office (NOT your supervisor) to explain why the salary discrepancy exists. If the two of you had similar qualifications and experience and were doing the same job, in the same grade, the salary should be the same. On the face of it, it sounds unfair and possible discriminatory. Please tell us what you find out, and if you don't like the answer they give, keep asking. Valerie Maslak
fay.UUCP@seismo.css.gov (Peter Fay) (07/09/88)
In article <11732@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> seeker@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Karen Lynn White) writes: > >I'm bringing this up for advice but also because I wonder if a >lot of women find a place to work where they can pick up >kids or work flex-time without hassle and then stay there >when the money could be much better somewhere else. Is it >common to settle for fewer benefits in a comfortable place to work? > One thing that many (most?) probably don't realize, is that these insidious aspects of employment (lack of daycare or flextime, disallowing work-at-home or time for other parenting stuff, benefit inequities, etc.) which are always termed "discriminatory toward women" (which they are) often hurt men as well. I worked for the second largest insurance company for a while in Hartford (it employed thousands of women but had no daycare facilities). Out of my training class of 20, (50% women) I was the only single parent (I was raising two babies by myself) and the only one to be assigned to a position which immediately required being on call nights and weekends. The personnel director (a woman) and my supervisors knew my situation but just couldn't care less. For six months I continually risked my job by trying to get the sysop to fix the problems over the phone at 4 a.m. without my coming into work, and by taking unauthorized time off (for court hearings - the mother wouldn't pay child support). Luckily for me (and my children) there was a coworker (a older man) who used to cover-up for me in my absences, go into work for me at 3 a.m., etc. I am eternally greatful to that person because I was unemployed one year previously, and probably would have lost custody of my kids if I was fired. Anyway, the point is that many single fathers, or just fathers who might otherwise take on a more equal share of child-raising, are harmed and discouraged by the "male" attitude that ignores the needs of "mothers" (really "parenting") at the workplace. -peter -- peter fay Arpanet: fay@multimax.arpa UUCP: {bu-cs,decvax,necntc,talcott}!encore!fay
bridget@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Bridget Dobbins) (07/13/88)
Jobs for the Federal Government and the state of California are salaried according to a scale. The scale is (roughly, if I remember right) GS-1 to GS-20 (or whatever), with a GS-20 having the highest salary. Each level encompasses both a salary range and educational and/or skill requirements. For example, you can't progress beyond GS-6 or GS-7 unless you have a college degree. There is nothing secretive about this information -- you ought to be able to get guidelines from the University personnel department. If nothing else, contact your state government; I'll bet the salary ranges and requirements are very close, if not identical. The idea behind this is laudable -- uniform wage/skill requirements across a variety of positions make for fewer problems with charges of unfairness, discrimination, etc. The problem is that the GS ratings may be assigned by bureaucrats with an insufficient understanding of the skills required. In your case, "they" (used generically) may be able to point to differences in job experience and background between you and your predecessor. It may be that your background in math is counted less heavily in their "formulas" (which do exist, by the way) than the background of your predecessor. What I'm trying to say is that there may be discrimination, but it *may* be unintentional. (It would be interesting and perhaps worthwhile to find out whether you are the first woman to hold this position.) You ought to be able to find out how your salary was arrived at. (If your supervisor won't tell you, try the secretary of the person in charge of the University's personnel department. They're the ones who know the most, anyway.) Be careful how you handle this -- remember that loud charges of discrimination mation may cause you problems in your graduate studies (sorry, but we're talking real life here), and that documentation you see on how your salary was calculated will emphasize education, background, and experience. If you want it changed, you're going to have to calmly, clearly, and thoroughly document proof that your experience and background warrants it (is *at least* equal to that of your predecessor). I hope this helps you out and good luck, Bridget ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bridget Dobbins UniSoft Corporation ucbvax!unisoft!bridget Emeryville, CA
fay%pinocchio@multimax.ARPA (Peter Fay) (07/13/88)
In article <11732@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> seeker@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (Karen Lynn White) writes: >I'm bringing this up for advice but also because I wonder if a >lot of women find a place to work where they can pick up >kids or work flex-time without hassle and then stay there >when the money could be much better somewhere else. Is it >common to settle for fewer benefits in a comfortable place to work? One thing that many (most?) probably don't realize, is that these insidious aspects of employment (lack of daycare or flextime, disallowing work-at-home or time for other parenting stuff, benefit inequities, etc.) which are always termed "discriminatory toward women" (which they are) often hurt men as well. I worked for the second largest insurance company for a while in Hartford (it employed thousands of women but had no daycare facilities). Out of my training class of 20, (50% women) I was the only single parent (I was raising two babies by myself) and the only one to be assigned to a position which immediately required being on call nights and weekends. The personnel director and my supervisor (both women) knew my situation but just couldn't care less. For six months I continually risked my job by trying to get the sysop to fix the problems over the phone at 4 a.m. without my coming into work, and by taking unauthorized time off (for court hearings - the mother wouldn't pay child support). Luckily for me (and my children) there was a coworker (a older man) who used to cover-up for me in my absences, go into work for me at 3 a.m., etc. I am eternally greatful to that person because I was unemployed one year previously, and probably would have lost custody of my kids if I was fired. Anyway, the point is that many single fathers, or just fathers who might otherwise take on a more equal share of child-raising, are harmed and discouraged by the "male" attitude that ignores the needs of "mothers" (really "parents") in the workplace. peter fay Arpanet: fay@multimax.arpa UUCP: {bu-cs,decvax,necntc,talcott}!encore!fay