It really riles me up when people dismiss the pay gap between men and women (currently at 77%) as women’s choices to go into pink collar careers and stay home with their kids, which is part of it, but not the whole story. This is a convenient excuse people use without looking at the actual facts and studies on the issue. And to victim-blame women who are paid less, because everyone knows how lazy and whiny the wymyns are, amiright ladies?

The AAUW’s most recently study confirms what many other have found: when you control for men and women who have the same job, the same amount of experience and education, and work the same amount of hours, studies have shown women still earn 5-12% less than men do. As the study reports, “In 2010, median annual earnings in the United States for women and men working full time, year round were $36,931 and $47,715, respectively.” This report compiles statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Census Bureau and the Department of Education. Facts are facts, dudes. If anyone tells you the pay gap doesn’t exist, shove this report in their face, and then point out that when you account for pink collar jobs and women dropping out to care for children (or parents), it’s even worse, at 69%. Women’s naivete about how hard it is to get back into the workforce and their overall financial stability when depending on employed husbands is a whole other issue for another day (A man is not a financial plan, Ladies!). Two things Baloneyites can be proud of: Washington DC has the SMALLEST pay gap of any “state,” at 91%. I’m guessing that’s because of the high number of federal jobs, where due to the GS system, pay is transparent and public, and reasons for promotions and raises are clearly documented (in theory). And recently single, childless women in their 20s in large cities have surpassed men in the pay gap. Way to go single ladies! Maybe you don’t need to put a ring on it after all.

Which brings us to the question of why the pay gap still exists. One of the major hurdles is that in private corporations, employees’ salary and wages are a secretive business. It’s “impolite” to inquire what other people make, even your coworkers, and our corporate culture punishes those who want transparency. The other major problem is that women devalue their own worth. As the brilliant book Ask for It: How Women Can Use the Power of Negotiation to Get What They Really Want by Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever argues, most women do not negotiate salaries when offered a job or ask for raises later, which repeatedly widens the gap as they age. It doesn’t even occur to most women that they can negotiate, and that a salary offer is a starting point, not just what the company can afford to pay you. A lot of women are grateful to just get a job, and don’t have the ego to try to negotiate like most men are groomed to do (especially those familiar with business culture). And for good reason: there is clear evidence that women women negotiate for a higher salary or a raise, they are labeled as problematic, pushy bitches. Women wrongly assume that their bosses will give them raises when they have made significant accomplishments, and that if it doesn’t happen, they haven’t worked hard enough. Employers are more likely to deny salary negotiations and raises to women than men, and they are also more likely to be fired, demoted, or otherwise punished in the workplace for asking. Seriously, if you’re a lady who has a job, especially early in your career, read this book for Christsakes! It offers some great tips for getting over your fear of negotiation, not only for your salary, but for other aspects of your finances as well.

So what is this new-fangled Paycheck Fairness Act? And didn’t the Equal Pay Act and Lilly Ledbetter Act solve this problem? Well, you’d think. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 is pretty straightforward. The first clause is:

“No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex…”

The problem is, as mentioned above, corporations cloak employee salaries in secrecy. Lilly Ledbetter didn’t know until she’d been working at the Goodyear tire plant for twenty years that her salary was lower than all the other male managers, and only because someone slipped her an anonymous note. Title 42 of the U.S. Code at the time stated that you had 180 days to file a claim from when the discrimination first took place. The Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire Supreme Court case challenged this provision because there is no law requiring corporations to inform employees of other employees’ salaries. Ledbetter lost the case on the grounds that her pay was based on merit, i.e., she just wasn’t as good as a manager as the other guys. She claimed bullshit on this, and that her performance evaluations were sexist.

The Lilly Ledbetter Act, Obama’s first law signed after his inauguration, rewrites the time limit rules, so that the 180 clock resets every time you get a paycheck, which helps women who’ve been discriminated against over many years. It still doesn’t do anything about paycheck transparency, so that’s where the Paycheck Fairness Act comes in. It closes many loopholes that the Equal Pay Act doesn’t cover. It:

1. Doubles the amount of back pay you can sue for. Currently it’s 1-3 years.
2. Ends the exemption for small businesses to comply with the law. Half of all workers are employed by small businesses.
3. Provides clearer definitions of acceptable pay differences for men and women.
4. Prohibits employer retaliation. This is a big fucking deal, amiright Joe?
5. Provides more money to the EEOC for research, training and education related to sex discrimination.
6. Provides grant money for salary negotiation training for women and girls. Yes!
7. Requires federal contractors to submit employment information, including salaries.

So while employers are still not required to provide information on employee salaries to the employees (and probably never will, due to concerns about “right to privacy”) at least you can’t be fired or punished for asking. The bill did not pass the Senate in 2010, but the Lady Democrats of the Senate are taking it up again because of the War on Women. As Barbara Boxer put it, “We’re mad as hell and we’re not gonna take it anymore.” Does it have any chance of passing this time? The Republicans are still dead set against it, because they claim we already have the Lilly Ledbetter Act and it beats a dead horse. As anyone who can read and understand the two bills knows, it clearly doesn’t. The Democrats just have to wage a never-ending war on misinformation that Republicans spout to the right-wing press and their constituents. If it doesn’t pass, it’s only more ammunition for the Democrats in the fall, and it will only keep proving how real the War on Women is.

The ladies love you Al Franken!