[thechat] Payscale was P.o.Ws
Erika Meyer
emeyer at lclark.edu
Tue Jan 29 11:58:01 CST 2002
Judah wrote:
>It seems to me that the amount of money that a job pays is inversely
>proportional to the amount of contact/service that they provide to other
>humans.
yes, I've noticed that as well.
also, I know I'm opening a flaming can of worms here, but note which
professions are traditionally held by women.... and how difficult
they are... and how well they are compensated...
>This puts teachers, social workers, and daycare providers at the bottom of
>the pay scale.
(professions traditionally held by women.)
>And it puts programmers, CEO's, scientists, etc., much farther up.
which is why I, after being trained as a teacher, and only having
used computers incidentally, barrelled my way into some semblance of
"high tech." (never became a programmer, as my math skills suck...)
>I get the feeling that we don't value working with people because it's
>supposed to be "easy" due to the fact that we are people too.
hell no, it is not easy to "work with people" as a teacher, a nurse,
or social worker. It's difficult, taxing, draining, exhausting...
though it can be rewarding. But I've done both and I have to say
that working with computers is SO MUCH EASIER! Really & truly.
>Working with machines (especially computers) is supposed to be
>"hard" because they're different than us. Pretty fucked up if you
>ask me.
There's simply a different valuing of certain skills.
Parenthood isn't really given any social value either, & you tell me
how easy that is.
>Anyway, I feel bad for all of the hardworking early childhood education
>folks who make 8.50 an hour.
hah. Where I'm from they make $6.50/hr. No benefits, either. And
when my kid was in their care, I expected TOP QUALITY care from them.
Erika
--
More information about the thechat
mailing list