Originally posted by gacyfish:
Just saw a society online recently that is formed because the founders felt that it was unjust for women to be paid 1/3 less than men for the same job and they are calling for equality in the workforce......
Personally, i feel that it is justifiable for men to be paid 1/3 more than women....no offence to the ladies out there...but serving the country for 2 1/2 years more than justifies for the pay difference....i just don't understand why such a society should exists in the first place....ladies get a headstart in the working world while the guys are still studying...which means they get to earn 2 years worth in salary before a man starts to draw his first paycheck....the 30% more is just a small compensation for us men....
wonder how the rest of society feels?
i beg to differ that there are such 1/3 difference... maybe it is so in the public official employment... but in the private sectors.. most private companies do not and will not give that additional 1/3 more to male employees on the grounds of cost control, competition and watever nonsense excuses... the truth is because... they do not consider our men's contribution to the NS as any from of contribution to the company.... rather they consider it a national judicial legal obligations set by the ruling govt... of which they are not apart of....thus they are not liable to pay the men anything extra then the women simply base of sex.
secondly.... with the rising number of Foreign talents ( hereby denoted as FT) competing for local jobs... many men discovered that too often... our local men's and women's salary are being pushed down if not competed downward by such uncontrolled influx of cheap FT sometimes with highly dubious educational qualification and at times unbelievable lack of capability. in fact... many private firms prefer so called foreign FT over local men and women simply because they are cheaper... so wherefore the concern of 1/3 advantage for local men?? if the women jacks their salary up by 1/3... wont they simply be pricing themselves out of the market in certain areas?? i mean...... take a real hard look... the womens are not competing the local mens for jobs.... there are over 700,000 FTs or FW in singapore!!
the worst is when one of those MF FTs become the head of the company... i have heard that they actually reccommend to the local boses NOT TO HIRE local men... because we have reservist obligations and that alone would result in disruption to company 'smooth running' and at times would require the company to employ partimers to fill the gaps... as such... productivity would be 'affected'... and these foreign FT actually request that they should have a 'EMPLOY local MEN LAST' policy and that the firm should try to employ as many FTs as possible as they keep cost down because they are cheap and that they have no reservist obligations PLUS... they cant change boss easily thereby reducing woker turnover.
Lastly... at a bad economic times like these... i beg to ask... wherefore came the logic to boost the ladies pay (by as much as 1.3) when everyone else has been clamouring for pay cuts and pay freeze to keep their jobs in view of the local high unemployment... those moronic womens are trying to get their own local women's to be fired by their boss and get replace by cheaper female FTs????
OR was it a govt ploy to get local womens to be kicked out of their jobs and let the local men takeover their jobs since the boss would no longer have the additional cream if the local women are to get the same pay as men.
anyone sees a male chauvanistic attempt by certain officials by riding on the stupidity of some stupid local women leader's short-sightedness??
