Audi US shoots itself in the foot

[JagLover]

FredClogs said:

JagLover said:

Where there will likely be a pay gap continuing into the future is for women taking career breaks for child care and returning on more limited hours.

That's simply not true. There is no evidence to support what you're saying, every study I have ever seen concludes that even in like for like roles there is a pay gap, it is shrinking but at current rate not expected to close for generations.

Perhaps you would care to post this evidence for the UK?, as I have never seen any evidence of women paid less for the same role in places I have worked.

Perhaps you also need to look at the ONS data I posted. Fulltime men earn slightly less than women in the 22-29 age bracket and, by a smaller margin, more in the 30-39 age bracket.

The largest pay differential is in the 50-59 age bracket and career opportunities open to women, and their own ambitions, were considerable different when this cohort entered the Labour market.

Much of the decline seen since 1997 in the pay differential is almost certainly due to baby boomers retiring and younger workers with far more gender balanced career opportunities taking their place.

[Moonhawk]

FredClogs said:

That's simply not true. There is no evidence to support what you're saying, every study I have ever seen concludes that even in like for like roles there is a pay gap, it is shrinking but at current rate not expected to close for generations.

Of course in mean terms as a wider society the over all pay gap represents different choices between men and women but all the studies I've seen conclude that like for like, all things being equal in terms of role and hours women still get paid less.

The first presentation you linked to above seems to show that things like career breaks for child birth play a massive role in the gender pay gap.

"Association between age and wages breaks down for women in their 30s"

"The arrival of children has a lot to do with this"

It also doesn't claim to correct for things like sickness, hours worked, career choice etc. The study even concludes that further work is required to account for:

"Precisely how much of the gender wage gap can we explain from differences in accumulated (PT and FT) experience?"

"What is behind the lack of wage progression for PT workers"

"The role of occupational differences"

[KarlMac]

People seem more annoyed by the Budweiser advert claiming it wouldn't exist without migrants.

Given the time scale involved in producing such an advert it clearly has nothing to do with the travel ban, but that isn't stoppin people getting annoyed.

[FredClogs]

amusingduck said:

FredClogs said:

Lots of data here...

https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/Presentations/Rob%2...

also if in US data here...

http://www.aauw.org/aauw_check/pdf_download/show_p...

The first one is lots of analysing the "wage gap" that they define at the start as simply the difference between men and women's average £/hr.

That's not good enough. Why is there a difference? Are women being underpaid for the same roles, in the same sectors? Are women simply choosing jobs that pay less on average? It is not explored, so the resulting analysis is largely useless.

I will clarify my position, in that I do not believe that there is a wage gap for equal work performed. Earnings gap? Sure, but why is that an issue? If bob down the road makes twice what I do, but works 90 hours a week, no injustice there.

Your opinion is simply wrong. Whilst career choices and professional preferences account for some of the aggregated gap in earning all the studies I've read show that in like for like, hour for hour comparisons women earn less than men all other things being equal.

The good news is the gap is reducing across the board. It's a very strange topic to have a contrary or deliberately counter factual opinion on, if you have evidence to back up your opinion fair enough, I'd like to evaluate it, but as a matter of faith? Why? What's bothering you so much?

[amusingduck]

FredClogs said:

Your opinion is simply wrong. Whilst career choices and professional preferences account for some of the aggregated gap in earning all the studies I've read show that in like for like, hour for hour comparisons women earn less than men all other things being equal.

The good news is the gap is reducing across the board. It's a very strange topic to have a contrary or deliberately counter factual opinion on, if you have evidence to back up your opinion fair enough, I'd like to evaluate it, but as a matter of faith? Why? What's bothering you so much?

How can I prove that there isn't a wage gap? I can show you some discrimination laws if you like.

All of the studies you've read show a like for like wage disparity, please show me these studies.

[FredClogs]

amusingduck said:

How can I prove that there isn't a wage gap? I can show you some discrimination laws if you like.

All of the studies you've read show a like for like wage disparity, please show me these studies.

I'm out... I've linked two in depth studies, you've chosen to read so glenlo es in the which agree with your prejudice and stooped reading. You've got google, you do the research.

If you find any information to substantiate your assumption that in a like for like role a women is more or equally likely to be paid the same as a man please post it up.

[amusingduck]

FredClogs said:

amusingduck said:

How can I prove that there isn't a wage gap? I can show you some discrimination laws if you like.

All of the studies you've read show a like for like wage disparity, please show me these studies.

I'm out... I've linked two in depth studies, you've chosen to read so glenlo es in the which agree with your prejudice and stooped reading. You've got google, you do the research.

If you find any information to substantiate your assumption that in a like for like role a women is more or equally likely to be paid the same as a man please post it up.

Neither study corroborates your claims. The first is not like for like. I stopped reading the second once I realised it was talking about earnings, again, not like for like.

All those studies you've read which prove your argument, and you can't link even one

[anonymous-user]

vonuber said:

It depresses me to think of the struggles my daughters are going to face as they grow up, especially when confronted with things like this thread.

It depresses me to think that her own dad already has her down as a victim.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 7th February 14:17

[SKP555]

The give away is in Audi's response. Men and women are paid the same at Audi *when other factors are accounted for.* I would imagine that is the same for most companies and the employment market as a whole.


Oh, and here's Audi USA's executive team

https://www.audiusa.com/newsroom/corporate/executi...

12 men
2 women

[vonuber]

fblm said:

It depresses me to think that her own dad already has her down as a victim.

Edited by fblm on Tuesday 7th February 14:17

If that's your interpretation of what i wrote then that's your problem to be honest.

The only victim complex here seems to be from men who see their status threatened - it's a similar occurrence to what is occurring in computer games, where a bunch of man children are feeling threatened that their toys are being taken off them because companies are finally prouducing stuff that is not solely targeted at them.
It's where the whole 'SJW' stuff comes from. How hum.

[amusingduck]

vonuber said:

If that's your interpretation of what i wrote then that's your problem to be honest.

The only victim complex here seems to be from men who see their status threatened - it's a similar occurrence to what is occurring in computer games, where a bunch of man children are feeling threatened that their toys are being taken off them because companies are finally prouducing stuff that is not solely targeted at them.
It's where the whole 'SJW' stuff comes from. How hum.

The correct interpretation is..?

Something wrong with trying to ascertain if the gap actually exists within like for like scenarios?

Maybe I'll go dig out that report that women outearn men ,on average, in the 20-30 bracket. Then I can get a bit teary eyed, start warbling about signs of things to come, and how I lament the struggles my poor little lads will have to go through.

[anonymous-user]

vonuber said:

If that's your interpretation of what i wrote then that's your problem to be honest.

You said it depresses you to think of the struggles your daughters will face, especially things like this thread? How did you intend that to be interpreted? You don't think if she comes across such horrific struggles as reading this thread she won't be able to hold her own in debate or turn round and laugh at us because she makes more than all of us put together? She might surprise you.

vonuber said:

The only victim complex here seems to be from men who see their status threatened - it's a similar occurrence to what is occurring in computer games, where a bunch of man children are feeling threatened that their toys are being taken off them because companies are finally prouducing stuff that is not solely targeted at them.
It's where the whole 'SJW' stuff comes from. How hum.

WTF? You might want to get out more.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 7th February 15:52

[Derek Smith]

Monty Python said:

Puts advert on at the Superbowl pedalling the myth of the gender pay gap:

Audi puts advert on at the Superbowl in order to sell cars.

Whether they have shot themselves in the foot I don't know, but they got themselves talked about, at least while the thread stayed on subject. And that was, no doubt, their intent, to an extent.

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

Audi puts advert on at the Superbowl in order to sell cars.

According to the Alliance Of Automobile Manufacturers women buy 60% of all new cars and influence the purchase of 85%, so it makes sense to target your advertising toward them. I know I get no say what so ever in what my Mrs buys and have to make a solid investment case before buying anything for myself!

'Do I tell my daughter that... she will automatically be valued as less than every man she ever meets?"
WTF? No you don't tell her that you fvckwit because it isn't even remotely true outside of religious circles. I get that being controversial is terribly clever for advertisers but come on; what a pathetic ad. Fvck off Audi.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 7th February 16:18

[Derek Smith]

fblm said:

According to the Alliance Of Automobile Manufacturers women buy 60% of all new cars and influence the purchase of 85%, so it makes sense to target your advertising toward them. I know I get no say what so ever in what my Mrs buys and have to make a solid investment case before buying anything for myself!

A few years ago Mercedes used a fluffy cat in its advert. That's taking the mickey.

I'm looking for a replacement for my Focus. I like the car and would be quite happy to buy a new one. But, it seems, as we have grandchildren I've got to consider a Qashqi. It seems I have had my choice on my second car, so she gets to pick the new one. Yet she doesn't drive.

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

...as we have grandchildren I've got to consider a Qashqi...

Ugh. We've got a small fleet of hateful SUV's which are apparently far more practical for ferrying children around.

[vonuber]

fblm said:

stuff

It depresses me that a thread on this even exists. It's a car advert that gives across quite a good message - and yet here we have a bunch of men posting about how they (women) have nothing to complain about.

I have high hopes for my daughters; their mother is an intelligent and successful woman so hopefully that will rub off on them and they avoid following me and doing engineering.

I'm not sure why I need to get out more? I get out quite a lot as it happens, but your concern is touching so thank you.

[PurpleMoonlight]

oyster said:

Scares me just how paranoid the middle class, middle-aged white men are becoming.

They have everything stacked in their favour but still see women and non-whites as a threat.

How pathetic.

No not paranoid, just sick and tired of the victim mantra that is constantly publicised so that they in fact maintain their advantage.

[anonymous-user]

FredClogs said:

amusingduck said:

FredClogs said:

Lots of data here...

https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/Presentations/Rob%2...

also if in US data here...

http://www.aauw.org/aauw_check/pdf_download/show_p...

The first one is lots of analysing the "wage gap" that they define at the start as simply the difference between men and women's average £/hr.

That's not good enough. Why is there a difference? Are women being underpaid for the same roles, in the same sectors? Are women simply choosing jobs that pay less on average? It is not explored, so the resulting analysis is largely useless.

I will clarify my position, in that I do not believe that there is a wage gap for equal work performed. Earnings gap? Sure, but why is that an issue? If bob down the road makes twice what I do, but works 90 hours a week, no injustice there.

Your opinion is simply wrong. Whilst career choices and professional preferences account for some of the aggregated gap in earning all the studies I've read show that in like for like, hour for hour comparisons women earn less than men all other things being equal.

The good news is the gap is reducing across the board. It's a very strange topic to have a contrary or deliberately counter factual opinion on, if you have evidence to back up your opinion fair enough, I'd like to evaluate it, but as a matter of faith? Why? What's bothering you so much?

In previous roles I've had access to pay data for hundreds of thousands of direct & indirect employees across the world, and access to studies that have probably millions, that data did not show a like for like pay gap. This is corroborated by a recent report from Hay Group, which found a 0.8% like for like pay gap in the UK.

The headline gap is to do with representation in high paying functions and in high level roles. For example it is much more likely that you will find a female head of HR than a female head of sales, the head of sales position will be much higher paying than the head of HR. Also as you ascend the hierarchy it becomes dominated by men eg Fortune 500 are boards are under 20% women.

[anonymous-user]

vonuber said:

It depresses me that a thread on this even exists. It's a car advert that gives across quite a good message...

The thread exists because the ad is bo11ocks.

vonuber said:

...their mother is an intelligent and successful woman...

So not in fact "valued less than every man [she's] ever met" then? If it wern't for the commentary it would be quite a nice ad.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 7th February 17:15