The
issue of gender-based inequality in pay was a prominent theme at this year’s
Democratic National Convention. Numerous speakers called for “equal pay for
equal work” (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/07/25/elizabeth_warren_at_dnc_when_we_turn_on_each_other_we_cant_unite_to_fight_back_against_a_rigged_system.html),
and the final Democratic Party platform ratified by the Convention stated, “We
will fight to secure equal pay for women” (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=117717).
Here
in Massachusetts, pay equality has even taken a big step forward at the
legislative level. On August 1, the Republican Governor, Charlie Baker, signed
into law a bill requiring that “men and women be paid equally for comparable
work” (http://boston.cbslocal.com/2016/08/01/massachusetts-equal-pay-comparable-work-baker-bill/).
All
of this is of course an incredibly welcome development. Socialists have
historically been and should continue to be involved in the fight against
gender discrimination and inequality in wages in all sectors of the economy.
Sexist inequality is unjust and in fact damaging to the interests of all
working class people.
However,
an anti-capitalist and intersectional approach to gender pay inequality
requires ultimately taking the question a few additional steps further.
For
instance, while the often-cited statistic -- that women in the US earn
approximately 78% of what men earn -- is certainly outrageous, it is also the
case that both Black men and women, and both Hispanic men and women, earn less
than both White men and women (http://www.aauw.org/2015/07/21/black-women-pay-gap/).
Black
men earn 75%, and Black women earn 64%, of what White men earn; while Hispanic
men earn 86%, and Hispanic women earn 69%, of what White women earn (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0882775.html).
Moreover,
it is ultimately necessary to talk about wage inequality as a function of class
inequality. While winning an equivalent $10/hr wage for both men and women
working full time at Wal-Mart is an important first step, it is simply
insufficient for the conversation to end there. We also have to talk about the
fact that the men and women working for $10/hr at Wal-Mart earn less than 1% of
what top Wal-Mart executives earn (http://www1.salary.com/Rosalind-G-Brewer-Salary-Bonus-Stock-Options-for-Wal-Mart-Stores-Inc.html).
As
socialists, our end goal is not simply to secure an equivalent rate by which
the labor of both the men and women in a given workplace or industry is
exploited by their employer.
We
should therefore strive to bring to the fore the fact that the “work” of all
members of the working class is systematically undervalued against that of the
upper and ruling class within the context of capitalist society.
For instance, the current female President of
Harvard University, who makes close to $1 million a year, exerts the same (if
not less) magnitude of labor in a given year as the largely-female clerical
workforce at Harvard who earn an average of 5% of what the President makes (http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/5/16/administrator-salaries-990-2012/).
Or
take the single richest individual in Massachusetts (who happens to be a woman),
Abigail Johnson, CEO of Fidelity Investments, who has a net worth of $14
billion (http://www.masslive.com/business-news/index.ssf/2016/05/how_much_is_the_wealthiest_person_in_mas.html).
Abigail inherited control of the financial corporate giant from her grandfather.
Now,
if one wants to truly talk about “equal pay for comparable work,” there is no
way that Abigail has done a comparable magnitude of work as, say, a male or female born into poverty who has had
to work their entire life in order to survive and today has a (median) net
worth of $45,000 (http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/11/news/economy/middle-class-wealth/);
in other words, 0.000003% of Abigail’s net worth.