Scott Walker Codifies Work Discrimination

[Damen]

Am I surprised he did this? Nope. But I am surprised he was dumb enough to do it during a recall election. Oh well, I'm sure he'll have a nice cushy work-free job waiting for him at Koch Industries.

Also, if anyone thinks Obama and the Democrats are trying to scare people to voting their way...why? The GOP is doing a fine job of scaring people into voting Democrat already, Obama doesn't have to do a damn thing except come on stage and read a list of shit the GOP has done.

Fuck that. Tell 'em:

[chad sexington]

Am I surprised he did this? Nope. But I am surprised he was dumb enough to do it during a recall election.

I figure he's not expecting to see out the year, so he's trying to cause as much damage as possible, while he still can.

[clockworkgirl21]

Whatever gaps exist, he insists, stem from women’s decision to prioritize childrearing over their careers. “Take a hypothetical husband and wife who are both lawyers,” he says. “But the husband is working 50 or 60 hours a week, going all out, making 200 grand a year. The woman takes time off, raises kids, is not go go go. Now they’re 50 years old. The husband is making 200 grand a year, the woman is making 40 grand a year. It wasn’t discrimination. There was a different sense of urgency in each person.”

He really thinks this situation is the same as making it legal to pay women less?

[m52nickerson]

Second, I don't think this will result in a huge change. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair pay act of 2009 (a piece of federal legislation) should cover this sort of thing unless there exists some nuance I'm not aware of.

Unless he just want's to make people go through federal courts instead of state ones.

[Smurfette Principle]

Second, I don't think this will result in a huge change. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair pay act of 2009 (a piece of federal legislation) should cover this sort of thing unless there exists some nuance I'm not aware of.

Unless he just want's to make people go through federal courts instead of state ones.

Which he does, because it's harder and more expensive to go through federal courts.

[N. De Plume]

Am I surprised he did this? Nope. But I am surprised he was dumb enough to do it during a recall election.

I figure he's not expecting to see out the year, so he's trying to cause as much damage as possible, while he still can.

I’m guessing that as well.

He also just signed a bill requires teachers to stress abstinence while making it optional to teach about contraception. I don’t see anything changing in the public schools soon, fortunately. But watch out if your kid is in a religious school.

Whatever gaps exist, he insists, stem from women’s decision to prioritize childrearing over their careers. “Take a hypothetical husband and wife who are both lawyers,” he says. “But the husband is working 50 or 60 hours a week, going all out, making 200 grand a year. The woman takes time off, raises kids, is not go go go. Now they’re 50 years old. The husband is making 200 grand a year, the woman is making 40 grand a year. It wasn’t discrimination. There was a different sense of urgency in each person.”

He really thinks this situation is the same as making it legal to pay women less?

Yeah. Getting paid less because your employer is a misogynist is not the fucking same thing as getting paid less as a result of making your career a low priority.

Rather misogynistic viewpoint to begin with that all women are family first types while all men are career first types anyway.

[Stormwarden]

May the Wisconsin GOP be mauled by bears armed with cacti.

[VirtualStranger]

It's like the GOP are trying to spark a populist revolt.

[QueenofHearts]

Second, I don't think this will result in a huge change. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair pay act of 2009 (a piece of federal legislation) should cover this sort of thing unless there exists some nuance I'm not aware of.

Unless he just want's to make people go through federal courts instead of state ones.

Not true, as per wikipedia

All disputes which are capable of being brought in courts, arising under either state or federal law may be brought in one of the state courts, except in a few narrow case where federal law specifically limits jurisdiction exclusively to the federal courts.

The LLFPA's text has nothing in it limiting it to federal courts, and many of the bills it amended allow cases to be brought to state courts. So, again, unless there's some nuance I'm missing, this completely baffles me. Why on Earth would the Wisconsin republicans take such a chance and risk alienating their women voters when they have nothing to gain and nothing they can change? Oh, I know, they're stupid.

[m52nickerson]

If that's the case perhaps we are making a mountain out of a mole hill.  With the federal law the state law would be repetitive and this could just be an attempt to keep the state laws trim. 

[Sixth Monarchist]

It's like the GOP are trying to spark a populist revolt.

First person to support my hypothesis wins an Internet.

[N. De Plume]

If that's the case perhaps we are making a mountain out of a mole hill.  With the federal law the state law would be repetitive and this could just be an attempt to keep the state laws trim. 

Have you been paying attention at all to what kind of policies Walker works to pass?

[Lt. Fred]

I found this in the comments section:

it is so sad if any of you read these words on this page and believe that the heart of the matter is to keep women down. For those of you who claim to be educated, think through this and go read the real facts and see if anything in this article is real, or just a scare tactic? It is sad to see that the Obama administration is trying to scare women into voting Democratic. What ever your political affiliation, educate your self on the issues, don't just believe any political rant that is posted. Then make an educated comment.

Um....what?

"You only disagree with me because you're stupid and I'm smart. If you were smart like me, you'd know that Governor Walker has some nonspecific unbigoted reason to discriminate against women in the workforce."

"I'm not sexist, but it's fair and reasonable that women can be paid less than men because they're supposed to stay domestic."

"Besides, women choose to take time off work to raise their children. No one is ever forced by circumstances beyond their control to do things they don't want to do."

"And women are more likely to become a cost to their employer like that. So the employer has to recoup the loss by laying all women less. Or he could just not employ any, I guess."

[m52nickerson]

If that's the case perhaps we are making a mountain out of a mole hill.  With the federal law the state law would be repetitive and this could just be an attempt to keep the state laws trim. 

Have you been paying attention at all to what kind of policies Walker works to pass?

Yes.  Thing is if repealing this state law will not do anything because of the federal law and Walker is not trying to simplify the states laws he is wasting his time, which makes him an idiot.  I don't think he is, a lot of other things but not an idiot.  He has managed to get a lot of unpopular bills passed, that even if voted out will be hard to undo.

[Cataclysm]

So does that mean companies will pay women less for equal work and systemically drive men out of the work place to make more money?

Also they have vaginas and those are just icky

Penises are also icky, but at least they don't bleed on a routine basis. Vaginas are also a lot more likely to get infections and require more money to be spent going to the doctor.

I'm not kidding.

Also, vaginas are slimy. Yucky, yucky, yucky slimy yucky.