Talk:Equal pay for equal work

Active discussions

IcelandEdit

Is "amandment" a specific term for what Iceland did, or is it a misspelling of "amendment"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.25.160.193 (talk) 04:03, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

HungaryEdit

Can someone better explain (and/or provide a source) for this wording under Hungary in the table?

"Equal pay for equal work was included in the constitution. But it has changed, now there is only equality between men and women, and the pay is in the Labour Code."

Thanks. Jessicapierce (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Equal pay for equal work. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:09, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Gender Pay Gap Sections Clear Bias and Unfounded Statements.Edit

"they could be doing the same job and everything but the male would still get paid more"

"There are plenty of studies proving the gender pay gap and how big of a problem it is"

"The gender pay gap is a big problem in many different countries and this problem does not seem to be getting better"

All 3 of these statements either need references attached to back up the statements or need to be phrased as opinions/quotes.

Particularly the "and everything" part is a problem as it is a complete assumption as it implies that the 2 participants have NO features other than gender to separate pay but this is not known and so should not be assumed or phrased as a fact.

On top of that complaint, this whole section of the Article seems overly biased and gives no real context or explanation as to what the gender pay gap is believed/believed not to be.

There is no reference to any counter-arguments such as the flaw that comes with not taking into account the different paths men and women choose to take.

There is also only 1 reference to an article in the section and this article is hardly outstanding quality as in just its 1st paragraph it makes an assumption that contradicts its previous sentence:

Sentence 1: "It is against the law to pay women less than men for the same or broadly similar work, and these data do not reveal whether this is happening"

Sentence 2: "indicating that across the country women are being undervalued by their employers"

This obvious bias and lack of factual/proven information is clearly a problem on such a controversial issue.

I am not a very good writer so I don't ideally want to have to edit this myself, however, I will if I must to fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Welshyboy1 (talkcontribs) 22:40, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Return to "Equal pay for equal work" page.