« | »

Reid: Abramson Perfect Example Of Income Inequality

From the Washington Post:

Reid: If Jill Abramson story is true, ‘perfect example’ of why pay parity bill should pass

By Ed O’Keefe | May 15, 2014

During his weekly news conference, Reid was asked about reports that Jill Abramson, former executive editor of the New York Times, was pushed out in part because she confronted top executives about being paid less than her male predecessor, Bill Keller.

"Yeah, I saw that," Reid said. "I don’t know if — I don’t know how much validity there is to that. But there — stories are out today that she raised questions about why she was being paid less for doing the same job that the second-in-command was and certainly now her predecessor got a lot more money than she got."

"If it’s true — and I don’t know that it is — it’s a perfect example that is true why we should pass fair paycheck equities — fairness," he said later…

When has the truth of a charge ever mattered to Harry Reid? If he can use it to advance his agenda, he will glom onto anything. Or he will just make up something.

Ironically, however, this Abramson incident helps to prove how sexist Reid’s push for gender income equality really is. Apparently, according to the left, women really are not equal to men, after all. They cannot be fired for their poor management style, or their inability to get along with others, or even their poor work results. And, also, unlike with men, women must always be paid exactly the same amount as their predecessor. No matter how much time the predecessor had been on the job. And no matter if the predecessor was better at the job.

Meanwhile, none of this is true for men. In fact, if a male editor had been fired from the NYT it wouldn’t have even made the news. Unless he was gay. After all, not all men get the same pay as their predecessors or their colleagues who are doing the same job.

Look at the NFL, for instance. Some tight ends are paid more than others. Some tight ends are even fired. And there is usually no controversy. But, apparently, women must always be held to a lower standard than men. Which is sexism at most extreme.

Executives at the Times have strongly disputed several reports that Abramson was fired this week in part because she raised concerns about her compensation. In a memo distributed to staffers Thursday, Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. said that Abramson’s pay was "comparable to that of earlier executive editors" and that the issue of pay was not a factor in her dismissal…

‘Psst, Harry! Everyone knows that the NYT is in the pocket of the Koch Brothers. Pass it on.’

Still, The Times is now facing a moral conundrum. If they pay Mr. Baquet more than they paid Ms. Abramson, they will be called sexist. But if they pay him less, they will be called racist. What is a good liberal publisher to do?

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, May 16th, 2014. Comments are currently closed.

One Response to “Reid: Abramson Perfect Example Of Income Inequality”

  1. canary says:

    I recently told someone that while their boss was consistantly unfair in paying and favortism, but as “a white male” he didn’t have a leg to stand on and to look for another job if he wanted more money and he did. His boss was the loser.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »