Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    As an (ex-)lower-class white male, I gotta say:  No.
    
    Ray

    Well, I'm a white male, and I'm definitely losing it.
    
    Oh...
    
    You aren't referring to sanity?
    
    Never mind.
    
    --- jerry

       Assertiveness will always reap more tangeable rewards than
    passivity. Men will not stop being assertive just because women will be
    more so, or change the arenas in which they are known for their
    assertiveness.
    
        Most people will take whatever "advantages" they are given and be
    happy to have them. That's a symbolic application of self-preservation.
    
       The inequities that WILL be righted in this society will change too
    slowly, as always. But, they will happen, not over men's "dead bodies",
    but with their help. The example of the 19th amendment comes to mind:
    yes, women should have always had the vote, but they didn't. The
    majority of the patriarchy aggreed to correct the wrong. Requardless
    of what you think of the Kennedy brothers, they were instrumental in the
    civil-rights movement, and they were RICH "white men"
    
        Yes, "white men" are loosing their "advantage" in this society.
    "Better late than never." "No one's free 'til we're all free." "There's
    only one race: the human race." <--"We hold these truth's to be self-
    evident..."
    
         A balance in society is not a threat to anyone, because it makes a
    better world.
    
         We will have to expect people that have asserted themselves to
    gain power to not want to give it up. It wasn't "given" to them.
    Democracy, as a political system, is, by definition, unequal.
    Capitalism, by definition, rewards assertiveness. When the
    opportunities are equal, and we SHALL overcome some day, the assertive,
    aggressive, and ambitious will still have more.
    
            "White men" don't have an advantage; minorities and women have
    disadvantages. There is a small, but important difference.
    
         There is one painful irony that comes to mind: the inequities of
    214 years are going to be corrected on the backs of the most
    sympathetic, liberal-minded generation of "white men" this country has
    ever seen.
    
                                                                 M...
                                                

If one were to read all the 'pissin an moanin' in this file and then be
asked that question, they'd say definitely NOT!

    
    RE: .4  Yes Mike, I believe most Polish males are white males -
    I speak primarily from my experience, having had the "maiden" name
    Wolochowicz.  ;^)
    Although regionally in New England, one may not think of Polish
    males as a group having power, looking at where there are populations
    of certain ethnic groups congregated, as per your example Polish
    males -  in the Chicago and or Detroit areas to name a couple of 
    Polish "population pockets" that come to mind, I would venture to
    say that those in the majority, in this case Polish males, due indeed
    hold power by virtue of their very position in society.  That is, by the 
    nature of their gender and because of their traditional values in
    companies or in industries in these geographic pockets they would
    be more apt to have jobs and/or gain promotions than their female
    counterparts.  
    But you say, how can we really measure and compare the percentage
    of men and women in management roles when perhaps women don't want
    to be managers or in other higher paid positions.  
    Perhaps the issue isn't that women don't want higher paid jobs
    (perusing this notesfile I have seen many examples of women that
    would have loved a decent paying job so that they could better feed and
    clothe themselves and children and pay for heat in the winter) -
    so Mike can we for just one moment assume that women might just
    want to earn more than 69 cents on a "man's" dollar.   Perhaps we
    (we = in general *most* women) do not have the proper position in
    society necessary for us to gain the power that others seem to walk
    into.
                                   
    
                              

    -mike z
    
    women in general make 69 cents to every dollar a man makes..
    
    graduate engineering women when first hired make 1.06 (?)  to
    every 1.00 for a similar male.
    
    no conflict in statistics.
    
    Bonnie

    so are you agreeing with it or discounting it Bonnie?
    
    69cents eh??? isnt that like a stat from the 70's?  I mean, it HAS to
    be higher than that by now....
    
    And IF the 106 to 100 stat is indeed correct, isnt that just as bad as
    the .69 stat?  
    
    Furthermore, the "when first hired" stands out to me.  It says, to me,
    that once hired, they loose, and once again make the 69 cents.. is that
    what you are implying?

    The $1.06 vs $1.00 comes from IEEE, Al, and the decline after hire
    isn't to .69 but to something like .83.  I believe you're right about
    the .69 being outdated, I think it's on the order of .75 now.

    Thanks Maggie.  I knew that it JUST HAD to be more.....
    although .75 still sounds low, you could be right, I have nothing to
    offer to the contrary.
    
    As for the salery droping to .83, that sound awful hard to believe,
    but, see above.
    
    AL

    re .12, Al, do you have any idea how many women there are at Digital
    working in clerical and secretarial positions, for around $10. an
    hour????  (I don't know exactly either, but I know there's a lot)
     Do you even know any men at DEC who make $10. an hour?
    
    There are a handful of female engineers and managers
    at DEC making a lot of money, but the majority of women are still
    working in low level jobs.  Not because they decided to, but because
    it just worked out that way because of the way the society they
    were born into was set up.  (because they weren't valued or expected
    to amount to as much as men) 
    
    Many women are now growing up to realize that it's more important
    to have a career and make money than to "get" and/or please a man.
     That, IMO, is one of the main reasons it's gone up to 75 cents.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .14 Ayuh

    The wages of women *may* now be as high as .73 to the dollar, but
    it hasn't reached .75 yet.  (You may be confused by the rise from
    .59 to .69 over many years.)
    
    Not all WC2 work pays equally.  Then there's the possibility of
    overtime, which again varies from WC2 job to WC2 job.  Also, there
    is the little matter of development paths.  For some reason,
    secretaries are no longer expected to grow into their boss's jobs
    like they were when men were the secretaries.
    
    							Ann B.

    re .14, I think you've lost sight of the fact that most male blue
    collar workers make more money than most female clerical workers.
     I have had male friends who work in computer operations and they
    all made more money than me.  Why else do you think it's considered
    a "step up" by some people for a secretary to become a computer
    operator??????  Hmmmm??????
    
    Also, when you make mention of "not much more" in reference to a
    wage of $10. an hour, please remember (although it's probably been years
    since you made so little money yourself), that when you're talking
    about such small sums of money as a dollar or two more can a make a
    big difference in take home pay and in what a person can afford.
    
    I challenge you to find me a male employee at DEC, who has been
    with the company for at least 15 yrs., is at least 40 yrs. old,
    who makes no more than $10.50 an hour!!!!  I challenge you because
    I do not believe that man exists.  (He also has to be *not* mentally
    retarded or impaired, handicapped and must be able to speak English.)
     The reason this man does not exist is because there are just too
    many opportunities for men to move up in business.  But, it is 
   very economical to keep a army of low paid female clerical help to
    do all the dirty work and never give them a chance to grow.  I'm
    not talking about clawing and fighting their way up, I'm talking
    about giving them opportunities, like white men have always gotten
    in this country.
    
    Dana, do you have trouble accessing a terminal?  (do you make ten
    bucks an hr.?  don't really answer - only you know if you do - but
    please don't pretend that's the case if it isn't).
    
    Lorna
     

    IMO, the world of DEC is different then what is out "there".  with all
    the opportunities that DEC offers, if someone is not happy with their
    WC2 job, there is always education, ojt, self-paced computer learning
    etc. Here in the Customer support center in Colorado Springs, the
    majority of management are women, the teams of specialist are about
    50/50. 
    speaking from personal experience, I started out working as a WC1 in a
    clean room, then moved to stockkeeper(was one of the first women
    forklift drivers for DEC),then to quality control inspector, then
    secretary, computer operator, crr, then network specialists.  I figure
    the people(men and women) who are unhappy about their jobs here in DEC
    only need to look around and not be afraid to do different things. 
    I've been here almost 10 years and honestly, I admire DEC, alot.
    
    as for secretaries being the underpaid of DEC.  I'm sorry to disagree,
    there are few  assemblers, stockkeepers, quality control
    inspectors who make over $10, from the people I know here in the
    Colorado manufacturing area.  
    
    vivian

    re .19, Vivian, I think success stories like yours are not the norm,
    and I think it only happened to you because you are extremely
    intelligent, versatile, and ambitious (as well as being in the right
    place at the right time=lucky).  One of my closest female friends
    (actually closest female friend) at Dec started as an assembler
    and is now a materials manager.  Her story is rare.  She worked
    hard, she's bright, ambitious, and was in the right place at the
    right time.  I agree that, at DEC, extremely intelligent, ambitious
    women can be as successful as a male of average intelligence and
    ambition.  I do not think that the average woman can be as successful
    as the average male, yet, even at DEC.  I don't think we're at that
    point yet.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .20 The 'average male at DEC' does *not* represent the
    'average male'. 

    
    
    I agree, Lorna.  I think we're at the point now where some women
    can get ahead, but I don't think women have anywhere near the same
    opportunities for advancement as men.  I also agree with the suggestion
    you made that we'd be hard pressed to find a man who'd been in the
    company 15 years, has been a good performer* and was making around 
    $10.00/hr.
    
    *I added the part about performance, because I think we might find 
     some marginally performing men and compare them to high performing 
     women and find that their salaries were similar.  By marginal performer 
     I mean has gotten a "4" (when we had 4s) on a performance review or 
     been under performance-related disciplinary action, and by high 
     performer I mean 3s, 2s, and 1s on performance reviews.
    
    Justine
           

    Oh come now Lorna... Use yourmodel (re: $10 an hour, 15 yrs etal)
    cept try finding a woman.... it will be just as hard.....
    
    I highly doubt that you can find a woman that has been with dec for 15
    years, good performer, etal, and making ten an hour...... going a
    little far doncha think?

    re .23, believe me, Al, I don't have to look very far.  
    
  Lorna
    

    In my life before DEC, I workd for the State of New York in Albany. 
    It's been a few years now so I don't recall exact numbers but:
    
    A friend (an aide to one of the Representatives) researched job
    descriptions and salary levels for state workers.  She found that the
    groundskeepers were all men.  That their job description involved
    mowing lawns, clearing snow, emptying trash baskets on the plaza.  They
    did not have to be literate or have any education at all.  They were
    not responsible for the machines they used, but simply had to push or
    drive them. Their salary range was about $16K to $22K.
    
    More than 99% of the pool secretaries were women.  They had to have at
    least a high school diploma, certified secretarial training or 
    experience, and pass a spelling and typing test. Their salary range was
    about $11K to $16K.
    
    Benefits for both positions (medical, vacation, etc.) were approximately
    even, retirement was based on salary.
    
    This was 8 years ago and the purpose of the research was to do
    something about state workers' salaries.  I know that mowing lawns in
    the heat and clearing walks of snow is not pleasant labor and is
    difficult.  But in terms of skills required, the secretaries far
    surpassed the groundkeepers.  
    
    I do think the men had it much better.  I do not know what if anything
    was done with the numbers generated by the research.  The particular 
    research did not note race so I don't know if it was only white males
    that had it better. 
    

    When I started with Digital in 1974 I worked on the assembly line
    putting together sub-assemblies for DEC 10's. (remember those?)
    Most of the women who worked with me were either right out of 
    high school or empty nesters. The empty nesters didn't need much
    money and the post high schoolers didn't know any better. 
    We all built harnesses and cables and put together pc boards and 
    soldered and made power supplies etc. We weren't supposed to talk to
    much. We went to work by the buzzer and got paid by the time clock.
    We were told to tidy up our stations whenever a manager was in the
    general vicinity. If we were good we were promoted to clerk or maybe
    QC inspector or maybe, after 5 or 6 years, to supervisor.
    
    The men worked on the other side of "the wall". They called our area
    the sewing circle. Some were hired in as assembler 2's as opposed to
    1's. Most became technitions after a couple of years.
    
    Times have change. Digital has changed. I can't say DEC changed out of
    the kindness of it's heart, it just evolved.
    
    Regarding computer operators: I changed from an exempt job (accountant)
    to a computer operator (3rd shift) for family reasons. A computer oper-
    ator is exposed to hardware, software and usually learns programming. 
    This male dominated field is a great place for anyone to get a foot in 
    the door as opposed to a dead-end type job.
    
    Kate (sorry for the rambling)
     

	As for finding women at DEC 10+ years making $10.00/hr.

	One of the women in my cube section and two women down
	the hall, a women in personal and let me see...  That's
	all I can think of off the top of my head but I am sure
	I could come up with more.

	I haven't heard anyone mention a man????

	Now the issue about women being able to advance through
	her own HARD work. - BS.  I have been with DEC almost 9
	years as a real employee and another year as a contract
	worker.  For the most part the women that I have seen 
	advance "through the ranks", that is, out of WC2 jobs 
	and into WC4 positions were - young, single, flirty (for 
	the most part), not necessarily the brightest candidate 
	for the position but sure did look good.  This is not to
	say that some did not get there through skills and abliities.
	BUT many with the skills and abilities did not get there
	because they were not the above.  This is a major difference
	and this is what needs to be addressed - Why this is so.

	The last figure I heard for the difference in wages was
	.67 women to 1.00 men and this was within the past few
	years.  The reason I remember it is because it was an
	article about how women have actually lost ground over the
	past decade.

	_peggy

		(-)	
		 |
			It is not the why some women make the change
			it is the Why some women don't make the change
			that is the issue.

Peggy:

> For the most part the women that I have seen advance "through the
> ranks", that is, out of WC2 jobs and into WC4 positions were -
> young, single, flirty (for the most part), not necessarily the
> brightest candidate for the position but sure did look good.  

  Perhaps you're not looking hard enough, or assuming too much about
  the personal history of the women whom you consider succesful.  I
  know some of the women in NAC, and they made it on their individual
  technical talents, not on the way they look.  In most of the organ-
  izations I've encountered at DEC, there are plenty of people of both
  genders who were WC2/3 and are now very succesful WC4 folks, and
  IMO, the women represent a normal cross-section of human appearance.

  I'd be reluctant to name names, but start asking who started as a
  secretary, a teacher, a technician, etc.  I think you'll be surprised.

                                   Atlant

    We shouldn't forget that individuals of both genders that are
    considered *attractive* tend to do slightly better in the job market.
    I read this in Psychology Today some years ago. The gender standards
    may well be different but the phenomena exists for both. liesl

    
    	Everyone has stories about not the best candidate getting
    	promotions/better jobs. At my last job, my big programming
    	assignment went to a minority co-op student. Even tho I had to
    	help him do most of it, he got ALL the credit.
    
    	Then there was the buxom blond who worked in the stockroom for
    	5 years, then went to finance as a clerk. Then got laid off.
    
    	Within 2 months she was rehired and was sent to technical training
    	even though she had no technical ability whatsover. It turned out
    	her boyfriend was a manager and pulled some strings to get her
    	re-hired. That really frosted me. Myself and other technical people
    	were out pounding the pavement, while a clerk was in technical
    	school.
    
    	I have sympathy for anyone who experiences these type of things.
    	I take them personally because they always cause a set back in my 
    	career.
    
    	Guy
    

    Guy,
    
    You should only consider these to be setbacks to your career if
    you were the only other possible candidate.  For example, in
    your second situation, there was no guarantee that *anyone* would
    be kept, let alone sent to school.
    
    						Ann B.

    RE .29 I seem to recall a study that showed a direct relationship
    between starting salaries and
    
    height, regardless of age,gender,race, etc...

    re .32, of course, the "age of equality" is bound to seem unpleasant
    to (some of) those who used to be the privileged.
    
    Lorna
    

    The person who behaved with the least properness (dreadful word;
    sorry) was the white male manager who abused his managerial position.
    
    						Ann B.

     RE .31 and .32
    
    It is true that the re-hire of the woman may not have effected me 
    personally (I did apply for several openings after I was laid off and
    I don't know If she was hired for one that I applied for) but I know
    that she had not technical abilities. I didn't mean to lump both
    situations together in that respect.
    
    This was at a FORMER employer, not at DEC. I am a white male.
    I was told that I was being groomed for a programming position.
    I was told to learn DCL, Pascal and C, which I did. I did some
    complaining, but was lectured on the companies position on using CO-OPs
    blah blah blah... I didn't know what else to do then.
    
    And while I have the floor, the thing that really opened my eyes, was
    that our group's secretary, who had 15 year's experience, wasn't making
    much more than the young female secretary in the next group, who freely
    admitted that the only reason she was there was to marry a software
    engineer ( and she did). It broke my heart to see our secretary work so
    hard for so little money and recognition.
    
    I can honestly say that I've been shafted to a degree in every job I've
    ever had, including DEC. Now, I know what to do about it. And It breaks
    my heart to hear about any one else who has been shafted because I've
    been there :-(.
    
    Guy
    

    
    Io sono Italiano......
    
    As I said we all have stories of woe. 
    
    But, Is white-male corporate america behind the discrimination and
    shafting of employees? Maybe. In my experience, All managers I've ever
    known, including women and people of color, are quite capable of
    shafting their workers and do so. I attribute this to human nature.
    So, I can't say with confidence that if there were more women and 
    minorities in management, things would be better, because I haven't 
    exeprienced anything to indicate that. Although I think that managers
    that have worked their way up that ladder are generally better to work
    for than those who started out high on the ladder.
    
    My contribution to fight inequality at work is to complain when I see
    it, and to share my technical knowledge with anyone who wants it.
    
    Guy
    

    Discrimination is when someone is treated as a "member of a class" not
    as an individual.  Laws that mandate that individuals who are members 
    of certain classes be treated differently than individuals who are 
    members of anoother class are mandating discrimination.  Unfortuately a
    great deal of history has consisted of individuals who are members of
    certain classes being treated better or worse than individuals who are
    members of other classes.  My opinion is that when the law goes beyond
    saying that everyone must stop treating individuals as members of a
    class it is exceeding its authority.
    	One of the reasons that women earn less than men as a group is that
    many of them take ten or more years out of their careers to raise
    children.  If one group has only 75% as much total work experience as
    another group one would expect some corresponding disparity in salary. 
    I am not saying that this explains all of the disparity in salaries,
    but as long as the difference exists for significant numbers of
    individuals it will be a significant factor in salary differential. 
    Another related factor is that if one person is investing in a 30 year
    career and another is investing in a 40 year career it is reasonable to
    invest more in the 40 year career.
    	To talk about changing our culture and not valuing children is
    suicidal.  All the pension dollars in the world are not going to do us
    any good if there aren't people to grow food for us to eat, etc. when
    we are to old to work ourselves.  Changing our culture so that both men
    and women on average can have 35 year careers and the average ten year
    investment in childrearing comes from both may tend to promote parity. 
    It is also possible that the 30/40 split produces the greatest total
    return and is likely to be the path chosen by the majority.			
    						John
    

    Mike,
    
    Regarding being Italian. My mother is full blooded Italian. She married
    an Irishman. My name is Kate Donovan and nobody would know that 2 of my
    grandparents came from "Italia". What I'm talking about is assimilation.
    You could change your name to Smith and nobody would know the difference.
    I look Italian too! Being Italian was certainly a crutch to my grand-
    parents, Carmela and Rosario when they couldn't speak English and had a
    hard time learning English but their offspring assimilated perfectly
    well. I hear 'Guinea' jokes too. Some I even laugh at..so does Mom.
    
    Bleaching one's skin would be quite painful. Hair transplants to the
    chest and upper lip wouldn't tickle either. 2nd, 3rd, and 4th genera-
    tion Italian-Americans do not have it that rough. 
    
    Kate (Catalina)

    
    .37
    
    I thought you were a Romanian..
    
    or a Gypsy..
    

    .13 Lorna
    I worked for DEC for 7 years, started pulling parts in a stock room and
    went to school (Basic Electronics) and got a job as a Tech.
    troubleshooting systems to the component level. After that I got a job
    in Purchasing and was spending about 5 million DEC dollars per year. I
    was exempt at this point and did not get paid for the 15-20 overtime
    hours I put in each week. All my reveiws were 1-2 or 3 mostly 2 and I
    quit the company after 7 years because I was only making 10.00 an hour.
    There were women in my department, ALL of them made more than I.
    Im back now as a temp on 3rd shift making less than I was when I left
    2 years ago.
    Are white males loosing their advantage? You bet, should be equal pay
    for equal work, seems to me the sea saw tipped a little to far in the
    other direction.
    
    K.C.