Female Doctors Earn $365K Less Than Men Over Career

Read the comment policy

Showing 3 of 21 comments

I wonder what the numbers are at Catholic hospitals and other religious-run organizations. I'm willing to bet they don't do much better.

Why would a cash-strapped hospital pay a man more for doing the same work? If it could get away with paying women less, the hospital would never hire a male physician. Never. I recommend: Physicians and the Gender Pay at http://faculty.som.yale.edu/keithchen/papers/GenderNPV_WorkingPaper.pdf As for the wage gap in general: The "proof" cited to show there is wage discrimination against female workers is "women earn 77 cents to men's dollar in the same jobs." Contrary to what pay-equity advocates say, though, “women's 77 cents to men's dollar” does NOT mean women are paid less than men in the same jobs. Nor does it mean, even more incredibly in the vein of “men are stronger than women” (which to many people translates into "every man is stronger than every woman"), that every woman earns 23% less than every man, perhaps leading some of the more benighted and the blinkered ideological to believe Diane Sawyer of ABC News earns less than the young man walking up and down the street wearing a “Pizzas $5” sign. Women's 77 cents to men's dollar is arrived at by comparing the sexes' median incomes: women's median is 77 percent of men's. In 2009, the median income of full-time, year-round workers was $47,127 for men, compared to $36,278 for women or 77 percent of men's median. http://www.catalyst.org/publication/217/womens-earnings-and-income Median income is defined thusly: 50% of workers earn above the figure and 50% below. Think about what this means when you hear that women's 77 cents to men's dollar proves that women earn less than men for the same work: A lot of female workers in the higher ranges of women's median make more money than a lot of male workers in the lower ranges of men's median. Moreover, “women's 77 cents to men's dollar” doesn't account for the number of hours worked each week, experience, seniority, training, education or even the job description itself. It compares all women to all men, not people in the same job with the same experience. So the salary of a 60-year-old male computer engineer with 30 years at his company is weighed against that of a young first-year female teacher. Also, men are much more likely than women to work two jobs; hence, more often than women, a man earning $50,000 from his two jobs is weighed against a women earning $25,000 from her one job, so that he appears to be unfairly earning twice as much as she. Over the decades, strategically ignoring the true meaning of "women's 77 cents to men's dollar" has been less than productive: No law yet has closed the gender wage gap — not the 1963 Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, not Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, not the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, not the 1991 amendments to Title VII, not affirmative action (which has benefited mostly white women, the group most vocal about the wage gap - http://tinyurl.com/74cooen), not diversity, not the countless state and local laws and regulations, not the horde of overseers at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and not the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.... Nor will a "paycheck fairness" law work. That's because women's pay-equity advocates, who always insist one more law is needed, continue to overlook the effects of female AND male behavior: Despite the 40-year-old demand for women's equal pay, millions of wives still choose to have no pay at all. In fact, according to Dr. Scott Haltzman, author of "The Secrets of Happily Married Women," stay-at-home wives, including the childless who represent an estimated 10 percent, constitute a growing niche. "In the past few years,” he says in a CNN report at http://tinyurl.com/6reowj, “many women who are well educated and trained for career tracks have decided instead to stay at home.” (“Census Bureau data show that 5.6 million mothers stayed home with their children in 2005, about 1.2 million more than did so a decade earlier....” at http://tinyurl.com/qqkaka. Consider also: "a 2007 Pew Study on working mothers revealed that 60 percent of full-time working moms would rather be part-time -- up from 48 percent 15 years ago" at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peggy-drexler/dont-call-him-mr-mom-the_b_1573895.html.)   If indeed women are staying at home at a higher rate, perhaps it's because feminists and the media have told women for years that female workers are paid less than men in the same jobs — so why bother working if they're going to be penalized and humiliated for being a woman.   As full-time mothers or homemakers, stay-at-home wives earn zero. How can they afford to do this while in many cases living in luxury? Because they're supported by their husband, an “employer” who pays them to stay at home. The implication of this is probably obvious to 10-year-olds but seems incomprehensible to or is ignored by feminists and the liberal media: If millions of wives are able to accept NO wages, millions of other wives, whose husbands' incomes range from moderate to high, are able to: -accept low wages -refuse overtime and promotions -choose jobs based on interest first, wages second — the reverse of what men tend to do -take more unpaid days off -avoid uncomfortable wage-bargaining (http://tinyurl.com/3a5nlay) -work part-time instead of full-time All of which lower women's median pay. Women are able to make these choices because they are supported — or if unmarried anticipate being supported — by a husband who must earn more than if he'd chosen never to marry. (Still, even many men who shun marriage, unlike their female counterparts, feel their self worth is tied to their net worth.) This is how MEN help create the wage gap: as a group they pass up jobs that interest them for ones that pay well. If the roles were reversed so that men raised the children and women raised the income, men would average lower pay than women. Points to ponder: Why would "greedy, profit-obsessed" employers, many of whom where possible hire illegal immigrants for their cheap labor, pay men more than women for the same work? If employers could get away with that, they would not hire one man, ever. The power in money is not in earning it (there is only responsibility, sweat, and stress in earning money). The power in money is in SPENDING it. And, Warren Farrell says in “The Myth of Male Power” at http://www.warrenfarrell.org/TheBook/index.html, "Women control consumer spending by a wide margin in virtually every consumer category." (Women's control over spending, adds Farrell, gives women control over TV programs.) “There were fewer cases charging sex-based wage discrimination last year than the year before the [Ledbetter law] was signed, and the wage gap was wider in 2010 than it was in 2007.... The bottom line: In Obama’s first three years in office, the EEOC filed six gender-based wage discrimination lawsuits — down from 18 during Bush’s second term." -BusinessWeek, May 13, 2012, at  http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-17/to-lure-womens-votes-obama-turns-to-lilly-ledbetter” and at  http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-05-13/obama-pitches-equal-pay-to-win-women-even-as-charges-drop The Fact Checker at the liberal Washington Post gives President Obama "One Pinocchio" for lying about the gender wage gap. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-white-houses-use-of-data-on-the-gender-wage-gap/2012/06/04/gJQAYH6nEV_blog.html Excerpted from "Will the Ledbetter Act Help Women?" at http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-pay-act-help-women/ Additonal reading: Commentary of June 12, 2012, in the liberal, pro-female New York Times, "Motherhood Still a Cause of Pay Inequality" at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/13/business/economy/motherhood-still-a-cause-of-pay-inequality.html?_r=1

Thats typical for women in all jobs. Doctors are over paid and the American 38th world ranked health care system will destroy this county before anything else has a chance including debt. The American health care system is a total joke.