Robert Winner


This conversation is closed.

Open compensation data based on sex and race.

By Executive Order the Labor Department was directed to adopt regulations requiring federal contractors to provide compensation data based on sex and race.

At the same time a bill is in Congress for a vote on the same issues. This leads to the question of who makes laws. Is this largly symbolic / political to spur action from Congress by forcing his will on about one-quarter of the U.S. workforce.

Compensation data could be used to fuel wage related lawsuits and in turn raise the cost of goods and products.

CWI CIT Committee for a Workers' International - website of the CWI. This is the group lobbying for 15 now. Shown in the Photo of the web site provided.

So the question is why are the marxism / socialists / communist organizations so involved in the new executive orders .... should we be concerned?

  • Apr 12 2014: If one quarter of the workforce is government contractors, it's time to REDUCE the amount of spending the government does. Problem solved.
    • thumb
      Apr 13 2014: Actually, I have read that there are about 4 million federal employees and about 3 million service contract employees. Haven't confirmed that number, but I would think it is about right. When you look at the count of the two dozen secretariats and all the czars and staff, the current administration is bigger then the last administration by over a million, which could account for the more rapid rise in the national debt. in the last 5 years.
      But if the congress has unlimited taxing authority, nearly unlimited contractual authority and federal employees doing the revolving door with lobby firms, funded by crony capitalists... I don't think it is likely that
      there will be any reduction any time soon.
      • Apr 13 2014: And we can tell someone with precursors to lung cancer to stop smoking. He won't do it, any time soon. So long as people volunteer to stack Congress with those who promise to promote any intrusive ideological agenda (conservativism is every bit as intrusive as liberalism--got to pay to enforce all those morality laws and pay for that strong military, after all), things will continue as they are. Unfortunately, the only major voices against this kind of thing also indulge in lunacy like demanding a return to the play-pretend "gold standard" or just go off into lalaland in general.
        • thumb
          Apr 13 2014: It doesn't need major voices who sometimes go off half cocked, but a few years ago, people got upset with this spending and started the so called TEA party, they went down the road of cutting taxes, a noble idea but can't be done with a broad axe but a fine scalpel. What the TEA party should have done was to go after congress with a demand for term limits, the patronage of lobbyist as bribery and a balanced budget amendment.
          What I am saying is nothing will get fixed until the congress returns to being the elected representatives of the people and not coronated nobility sent to the castle on the hill above the Potomac. Don't get me started on the king's court that meets at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. .
  • thumb
    Apr 10 2014: Lefties.... Righties..... Up the middleess. I am still working on the idea of reporting compensation by race and sex. I have had some serious experience involved in Federal contracts.... In my day, the "law" had a contractor submit a copy of his payroll.... name, job title and salary. Ostentatiously, ( I like that word ) it was to insure that he was paying appropriate salary to his employees, there were published records of typical pay for typical work that were used. These records were developed for contractors for use in calculations of labor cost for project estimation for government contracts.
    I had always felt that the government was in fact establishing the pay levels.
    I had always thought that a.... carpenter's helper is paid $14.75 an hour regardless of race, creed, sex or national origin... Maybe the real problem is that we have too many bureaucrats and this is a make work situation to manage these information data bases.
    • Apr 29 2014: Ostentatiously?
      think you may have meant:
      Definition of OSTENSIBLY. 1: in an ostensible manner . 2: to all outward appearances
      • thumb
        Apr 29 2014: No, I meant Ostentatiously. They were showing off. By providing required payroll data in a bound powerpoint presentation, they figured that we would be so impressed, we would not watch carefully and that they could cut corners and pocket thousands if not millions.
  • thumb
    Apr 19 2014: A customer (or potential customer) can ask you whatever he wants. As a supplier (contractor in this case) you can refuse to answer the question but, doing so you run the risk of not getting the contract.
    The private industry is not much different. Not necessarily are they asking about compensation, let alone sex or race based, but sometimes customers require information from their suppliers that are delicate or outright confidential in nature.
    Example from my own experience. We were suppliers to large multinational companies. Some of them wanted to know the full cost of production. Everything from feed stock, manufacturing and whatever other overheads there were.
    As a supplier you can negotiate but often you have no choice but to comply if you want to get (or keep) the business.
    • thumb
      Apr 20 2014: harold, There are so many factors in this issue .. the stats say that women earn 77 cent on the mans dollar. In the White House staff, the Presidents own staff, women make 80 cents to the males dollar. So who is he trying to impress. This is just political BS as usual. Congress makes wages and earning laws .. minimum wage ... etc ... but yet we know that the President has said he will work outside of Congress and the Constitution to get his way. So he makes the rules for one fourth of the US contractors while the rest must obey the laws set for the American public by Congress as stated in the Constitution.

      For one fourth of the Contractors there is no option ... comply or die. There is not a great demand for fighter jets, machine guns, etc ...

      So I put out the stats on who makes what and guess who is waiting with big eyes and plenty of lawyers ... unions. The law suits will flow like open beer taps.

      I worked in Industry also at General Dynamics. We had a guy three time over the drunk line and ruined millions of dollars of materials ... he was arrested .... the union went on strike to have him rehired. The union will drive some contractors out of business with this one.

      What will happen in right to work states? Once this info gets out the whole industry will be challenged.

      The federal government is already entering into the commercial business .... when will it stop?

      The cost of tanks and jets is about to go sky high. The 16 trillion dollars national debit is about to look good.

      Be well. Bob.
      • thumb
        Apr 21 2014: First, I'm against unions because I believe that they are toxic to economic development.
        However, I also disagree with women making less than men. There is no logical reason for that.
        I don't even know why that is, but probably, men are tougher in negotiating their terms and that's why they eventually end up with better salaries.
        • thumb
          Apr 21 2014: Harald, I can make stats prove anything I want them to. So I am not a great believer in when people use stats, surveys, or state "we all know" ... it is usually BS.

          So how do you get these "stats". Say a office has 20 engineers, 10 supply people, 10 sales, 10 executive staff, and 20 secretaries and three receptionists.

          One half of all engineers, supply, sales, and execs are female/male so pay is roughly equal. What will drag the ladies down is the 23 receptionists and secretaries. So we went from equal to 70 cents on the dollar. This is a argument that empolyers will never win.

          When people understand that the presidents female staff are also paid less ... his credability will take yet another hit. Want to bet that this news will not get out. LOL.

          I agree with you on unions. They are a product of Karl Marx and are the closest thing to pure communism in the United States ... in concept ... and yet very much capitalist in function with the top making a bundle and rank and file making little or nothing.

          Listen to the conversation between Steve Jobs and Obama on why Jobs went to China with his manufacturing plants ... unions and federal regulations are at the top of the "because List".

          In the jobs I have had the position has a high and low wage range ... not male VS female. It is based on the projected earnings of the company ... costs ... and profit margines.

          People who jump on these band wagons have lost the ability to think for themselves and have become sheeple.

          Thanks for your reply. I wish you well. Bob.
      • thumb
        Apr 21 2014: You are right about statistics. They can and often are abused to make a case.
        Without knowing the details how those statistics were made up it's difficult to form an opinion.
        Beside that, I also find it difficult to compare incomes unless we talk about something fairly straight forward as a janitor function.
        But even secretaries might have different job descriptions and different responsibilities and therefore make different salary. The employer also makes a difference. One company might in general pay better than the other.
        From my point of view all income should be merit based. You perform well you make money, if not, well, then bad luck.
  • thumb
    Apr 10 2014: I guess all those so-called "lefties" are involved because of all the fascists, kleptocrats, criminals, self-righteous and other arrogant "righties" who are, themselves, attempting to promote their own agendas and policies. Ain't balance wonderful :)
  • Apr 8 2014: It does NOT lead to the question of "who makes laws". As the guy officially in charge of administering the day-to-day affairs of running the USA, the President is not making laws when he promulgates something that only applies to government contractors. If I were to hire a company on contract, and the terms of my contract included that I was allowed to meddle in their employment practices, then I would NOT be "making laws" when I meddle. The contract ALREADY ALLOWS ME TO MEDDLE. Contractors are not compelled by law to be contractors.
    • thumb
      Apr 8 2014: Executive orders have the full force of law. The new system makes a two tier system .. one the "government" contractors and 2) All other contractors. The government contractors have no options but to obey the Executive Orders and the law, while the other contractors must obey the law. Therefore he has made or altered the 'Law" as to what "some" contractors MUST do while conducting business with the US government or to remain in business at all.

      That is why we have three branches, by Constitution, in our government. United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself.

      If this is not law then government contractors will have the right ot ignore this direction. Do they? At what expense?

      If Congress has the same issue in a Bill awaiting vote .... why would a President try to implement it as law for government contractors without the vote of Congress. That is working around Congress and outside of the scope of Presidential duties. As the sitting President said "I will work outside of Congress to do what I want". And he is.

      You seem to justify this action .... while I see it as scary.

      It does however have the full support of the CWI CIT Committee for Workers International as can be seen on the web site
      • Comment deleted