Why be OK with even that? The explicit assumption underlying women entering the workplace was "we can do the job just as well as men".
Either hold them to that, or acknowledge that the premise was false and that any conclusions drawn from that faulty premise should be called into question.
If you can do the job just as well while you're on the clock, but are on the clock 20% less, you do the job 20% less. If you're doing the job 20% less, you should receive 20% less pay, give or take a small amount for fixed cost fluctuations. Neither sex mentioned in this paragraph, just general case.
To me that's basic math and logic, but as we know, basic math and logic are both white and male supremacy, at least according to the Smithsonian and most intersectional scholars.
Just because you aren't being paid doesn't mean the work doesn't still need to be done. Maybe I don't want someone who only works at 80% capacity working for me even if I'm only paying them 80%.
Maybe they sold themselves as being 100% capacity workers, so that is my expectation; and if they fail to meet that expectation then it is reasonable for me to reconsider my end of the deal.
Of course. A hiring contract should clearly lay out all work expectations reasonably expected to be encountered, and if it is not adhered to by either EE or ER, it should be considered breach.
Why be OK with even that? The explicit assumption underlying women entering the workplace was "we can do the job just as well as men".
Either hold them to that, or acknowledge that the premise was false and that any conclusions drawn from that faulty premise should be called into question.
If you can do the job just as well while you're on the clock, but are on the clock 20% less, you do the job 20% less. If you're doing the job 20% less, you should receive 20% less pay, give or take a small amount for fixed cost fluctuations. Neither sex mentioned in this paragraph, just general case.
To me that's basic math and logic, but as we know, basic math and logic are both white and male supremacy, at least according to the Smithsonian and most intersectional scholars.
Just because you aren't being paid doesn't mean the work doesn't still need to be done. Maybe I don't want someone who only works at 80% capacity working for me even if I'm only paying them 80%.
Maybe they sold themselves as being 100% capacity workers, so that is my expectation; and if they fail to meet that expectation then it is reasonable for me to reconsider my end of the deal.
Of course. A hiring contract should clearly lay out all work expectations reasonably expected to be encountered, and if it is not adhered to by either EE or ER, it should be considered breach.