Women no longer considered workers

[China_cat]

From the Department of Labor

http://www.bls.gov/ces/cesww.htm

Discontinuation of Women Workers Employment Series

Following the release of preliminary December 2004 data in February 2005, estimates for women workers will no longer be produced by the Current Employment Statistics program (establishment survey) in an effort to reduce respondent burden.

Data for women workers and other demographic information related to employment from the Current Population Survey will continue to be available at http://www.bls.gov/cps/.



Last Modified Date: November 5, 2004

=====================

That's it, the whole thing. Statistics will no longer be kept on women workers. Which means employers will be able to discriminate on the basis of gender with impunity. No stats, no way to prove discrimination.

About the only labor the Bush admin sees as fit for females will be that attended by a midwife.

[sangh0]

1. I think you need to re-read the policy

Women are still workers. It's just that they will no lonfer keep seperate statistics on how many workers are women,

If you want to fight bad policy, you first have to understand what it is, and is not.

[China_cat]

2. If you aren't counting women

when you are counting ages and races, then why isn't it to be considered that the government has decided that women have no more use in the labor force?

According to the statistics they will be keeping, it will look like it is all male and provide perfect cover for employers to discriminate on the basis of gender.

[sangh0]

5. Read it! They ARE counting women

They're just not counting them seperately

why isn't it to be considered that the government has decided that women have no more use in the labor force?

Yes, it's BAD POLICY, but that doesn't justify distorting the facts. They *ARE* counting women, and women will continue being workers.

According to the statistics they will be keeping, it will look like it is all male

No, it will not look like it all male. The effect is that it will be impossible to determine exactly HOW MALE it is.

and provide perfect cover for employers to discriminate on the basis of gender.

That is true, but if you continue to mistate the facts, you will be ignored (at best) or discredited, by those who know better. Why do you object to stating the facts as they actually are, instead of exagerrating them?

[annabanana]

4. Systemic discrimination will no longer be detectable....n/t

[sangh0]

6. Right! Isn't that bad enough?

Why distort it into something ridiculous?

[Ducks In A Row]

7. didn't sound like a distortion of any kind. sounds like the truth...

employees will be able to fuck women over without anyone tracking it anymore.

[sangh0]

8. Saying "women will be f**ked over" is not the same as

saying "Women will no longer be workers"

They will still be workers; Fucked over workers, but workers nonetheless.

[Philostopher]

3. Probably at least part due to the fact that ...

the pay discrepancy between white men and white women -- the highest two pay levels -- still is about 76¢ for the white woman to $1.00 for the white man, and getting worse again (according to some studies' projections in recent years).

If they don't do the studies, the information doesn't 'trickle down' and women can be paid less and less without kicking up a fuss about it. They don't want us to spoil our beautiful minds, or worry our pretty little heads about it.

This is the kind of statistical evidence that doesn't enable the current pogrom, so of course they don't want to know it. If they know it, people can get it; if they don't collect the information in the first place, we're on our own.