[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