24%, is that debatable? ---- Still this nagging figure despite the
promises made every March 8. The average wage income of women is 24%lower than that of men in the private sector. How can we explain this
constant? How is a society proclaiming equality capable of maintaining
such an injustice while hiding other equally scandalous ones? Marie
Donzel answers this question in her book, half-essay, half-pamphlet with
a cheerful tone and denunciation of "good excuses", Les Inégalités
justees published by Rue de l'échiquier in 2024. ---- Yes, the style is
lively, clear, the arguments are stated and denounced in an incisive
manner like the title of the collection, Les incisives. The title would
seem confusing. How to justify inequalities? The subtitle gives the
angle of attack of the book: How to pay women less with a clear
conscience? In the prologue, another shocking figure: the unexplained
gap would be only 4% based on the Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition. This
approach allows to justify these gaps by accepting discriminations,
beliefs that block any fundamental salary and societal improvement. "Let
us therefore reveal the unthought-of (and also the ideological logics)
that prevent real salary equality from happening by examining these
famous justified inequalities." After a 19th century where salary
inequality in the workshops was systematic and even encouraged by
certain trade unionists, with the notable exception of Eugène Varlin,
the International Labor Organization affirms in the preamble of its
constitution, the principle "equal pay for equal work" introduced into
our French law in 1972... But why? According to Marie Donzel, we must go
back to the civil code of 1804. The man is the head of the family, he is
the one who brings home the salary, enough to support his wife and
children. In addition, the woman is a minor and her salary can only be a
supplement. You will read these justifications from another age. In the
1970s, the method mentioned above slices up inequalities to arrive at
the unexplained 4%. And it passes into society and into the company.
From law to facts...
Are we in the unconscious, cognitive biases? Marie Donzel gives us and
explains a series of examples of the "language of biases". Let's add
stereotypes to that. They would not be able to negotiate like men, they
accept their situation more easily, even their state... The author calls
for mobilization: "The only good reason to try to explain inequalities
is to give ourselves the means to act effectively against their creation
and perpetuation."
The use of the four-day week demonstrates management manipulation. They
are given one day to look after the children, so they cannot be paid
full-time. And pressure is put on so that the work to be done in five,
is done in four. An insidious increase in productivity that is
reminiscent, but more subtly, of the assembly lines in automobile
factories in the 70s and 80s, whose foremen increased the speed without
saying so. Less present in the workplace, they are perceived as less
invested and less demanding.
A form of social contempt?
The seniority of women in the company does not allow them to access
equal pay. They raise children, they are subject to the geographical
mobility of their spouse, they know the glass ceiling both in the
company and in the civil service. And here, the explanations are
astonishingly bad faith. They do not accept the constraints of the
position, they do not feel capable of taking on responsibilities, they
have not chosen the right economic sector. Why work in education, social
work, the judiciary? Everyone knows that it pays badly. And a shock
question: why would an engineer be paid like a nurse? He would have more
skills, responsibilities, working hours and not the nurse!! How can we
not see this as a form of social contempt for the "little ones"?
The qualification of women is also called into question. However, they
are more qualified than men. Their physical resistance would not allow
them to be given the same positions and therefore the same salaries and
yet we all have daily examples proving the opposite. In fact, diversity
encourages equality in performance. The big word is out: Performance,
the triumph of liberalism. You will read these pages and measure how
much the working methods introduced by consulting firms such as McKinsey
and Sandberg maintain virile values, the foundation of capitalist
society. With this sentence "it would be better if it were a man!", you
have understood that there is no progress in equality. And Marie Donzel
concludes: "It is high time to renounce male privilege."
* Marie Donzel
Justified Inequalities Ed. Rue de l'Echiquier, 2024
https://monde-libertaire.fr/?articlen=8242
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten