Hacker News Reader

Which implies that the solution to the problem is to LOWER the pay of men to match the pay of women. I think the term "unintended consequences" can be writ large here by now.

View on HN

It implies no such thing.

Just so I understand: what DOES the statement imply? Think of me as mentally deficient here and explain it like you'd explain it to an 8 year old.

He is saying that there should be no pay gap based on gender and if that were the case women would not need to ask for a raise to bring their salary up to the same as what a male in the same position would make.

It implies only that he wants to see men and women paid equally for equal performance. There's no particular reason to think that he would achieve this by lowering the salaries of better-paid employees (where better pay was not correlated with superior performance) rather than by increasing the salary of worse-paid employees (likewise).

If he's smart, he'd engage an outside auditor to measure employee productivity and how well it correlates with salaries, then raise the pay of any group that wturned out to be systematically disadvantaged.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com