A new study that compares salaries of first-year male and female college graduates challenges assumptions that women’s life choices cause them to earn less than men.

In “ Graduating to a Pay Gap,” American Association of University Women researchers Christianne Corbett and Catherine Hill calculated that women who graduated in 2009 earned, on average, 7 percent less than their male classmates — after factoring for variables such as academic major choices, hours worked and compensation disparities between professions.

The long-term negative impacts of that finding matter in Maine, where women make up 49 percent of the workforce and graduate from postsecondary schools in higher percentages than men, according to the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women.

Corbett and Hill found that within the same profession, women launching careers made less than new male hires with similar credentials. For example, male business majors earned a little more than $45,000 on average, compared with $38,000 for female business majors.

The situation for female college graduates, who earned an average of 82 cents for every $1 their male counterparts were paid, is better than the national labor force as a whole. In 2011, the most recent year for which the U.S. Census Bureau provides data, women throughout the country earned 77 cents for every $1 male workers received. In Maine, women who worked full time earned 79 percent of what their male peers did.

The troubling aspect of Corbett’s and Hill’s findings is that they indicate a gender pay gap begins at a time when men and women entering the workforce should be on equal footing. Reasons typically offered to explain women’s lower earnings potential — such as leaving the workforce to have children and care for family members — don’t apply to candidates fresh off campus.

“One might expect that when you compare men and women with the same major, who attended the same type of institution and worked the same hours in the same job in the same economic sector, the pay gap would disappear,” Corbett and Hill wrote.

But it doesn’t, and while researchers attribute at least part of that “unexplained” 7 percent gender pay difference to discrimination, which can sometimes go unrecognized by both male and female employers, they say much of it relates to women’s and employers’ approach to salary negotiations.

While some employers are put off by strong female negotiators, “Men’s aggression might have been met with a more positive response because of old-school thinking that men need the salary to provide for their family,” Bates College sociology professor Emily Kane theorized.

In Maine in 2012, that logic no longer applies, and perpetuating it would be a drag on the overall economy. Women make up more than half the state’s population, and 10 percent of all households in Maine are run by single mothers, twice the number headed by single fathers.

When female college graduates who head households earn less than men with similar qualifications, they have less money available to raise their children and smaller financial bases for retirement. Hardships created by falling behind at the outset of a woman’s career affect her children’s likelihood for success and worsen her quality of life as she ages.

The AAUW study also should spur employers, educators and young Mainers preparing to embark on a career to consider why society undervalues professions, such as education, social work and caregiving, that typically attract a higher percentage of female employees.

“Just opening up traditionally male-dominated fields like engineering to women doesn’t stop us from needing people in those other fields, so while it helps address the explained part of the gender pay gap, it still tends to reward typically male domains more than typically female ones,” Kane said.

In Maine, where women live an average of five years longer than men, paying women less for comparable work contributes to elevated poverty rates among children and elders. That increases reliance on government-funded social welfare programs.

To address the problem, initiatives similar to the WAGE Project, which visits campuses to teach women to be better negotiators, could be introduced in the state’s high schools as part of the new focus on helping students make better choices about postsecondary education and careers.

With some sentiment in Congress to revise the Equal Pay Act of 1963 in a way that would impose greater government oversight of compensation equity, employers ought to take the opportunity now to prove that intervention unnecessary by implementing clear, gender-neutral criteria for what entry-level positions are worth and by committing to transparent, nondiscriminatory employee evaluations.

Aside from being a basic right, pay equity is good economic policy.

Join the Conversation

7 Comments

  1. Re: “male business majors earned a little more than $45,000 on average, compared with $38,000 for female business majors.”

    Here’s why in just one example of why on average even the most sophisticated, educated women earn less than men even in the exact same profession:

    “In 2011, 22% of male physicians and 44% of female physicians worked less than full time, up from 7% of men and 29% of women from Cejka’s 2005 survey.” http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/03/26/bil10326.htm

    A thousand laws won’t cure that.

    In truth, 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, who share their wealth and affirmative action benefits with white men – 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 largely 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 12-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.

    From “Will the Ledbetter Act Help Women?” at http://malemattersusa.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/will-the-ledbetter-fair-pay-act-help-women/

    See also Christina Hoff Sommers’ commentary ‘Wage Gap Myth Exposed — By Feminists” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html

    1. You forget one thing…………facts. The studies showing pay inequity are based on the same pay for  the same job, hours worked, positions held,  for the largest part.
      So, if women were unable to choose how they wanted to work I suppose employers would then just decide to pay them equally?
      Please take this load of steaming trash and give a Union employee a job collecting it and bringing it to a green recycling center. A Union a woman will put this where it belongs.

  2. Funny – I was in the workforce for 40 years and I’ve never saw pay disparity based on sex for the same job – what a myth and BS……..

  3. As a manager, when the famous substance hit the fan and daunting tasks and sleepless hours loomed, who could I count on?  There was a real bifurcation and the split was almost always along gender lines.

    Women in family contexts definitely do face pressures at home which constrain their willingness to pull unscheduled overtime.

    The real world makes subtle anticipatory and not so subtle after action compensation decisions.  Sometimes these will be biased, often they will be seen as biased, but in the large picture they are more fair than current gender politics portrays them to be.

    Imagine how both men and women would choose to behave should the law, in rhetoric and in reality, require equal pay for unequal contributions. 

    Equity and equality are seldom true equals.

  4. As a manager, when the famous substance hit the fan and daunting tasks and sleepless hours loomed, who could I count on?  There was a real bifurcation and the split was almost always along gender lines.

    Women in family contexts definitely do face pressures at home which constrain their willingness to pull unscheduled overtime.

    The real world makes subtle anticipatory and not so subtle after action compensation decisions.  Sometimes these will be biased, often they will be seen as biased, but in the large picture they are more fair than current gender politics portrays them to be.

    Imagine how both men and women would choose to behave should the law, in rhetoric and in reality, require equal pay for unequal contributions. 

    Equity and equality are seldom true equals.

  5. Could it also be that men may negotiate better than women?  Especially at the beginning when it may seem equal, but if men wait to negotiate or women don’t and accept the first offer then this could be part of the gap, that then widens as time goes on.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *