Women Ripping Off Men And The Taxpayer
A local authority faces an estimated bill of £50 million after losing a sex discrimination tribunal involving thousands of women.
It was argued as a sex-discrimination case because the caring, cleaning and catering positions tended to be held by women.
Please take especial note that this hugely costly sex-discrimination case can succeed not because the women were underpaid for the jobs that they chose to do, but simply and purely because more women chose to do easier and lower-paying jobs than men.
Yep: That's all it takes.
And so, for example, if, perchance, just as many men, or more men, had chosen to do these easier jobs, then the women could not have made a successful claim! (And if, indeed, more men had chosen these easier jobs then the men could not have made a similar discrimination claim.Their gender alone would have precluded them from claiming any discrimination - no matter how low was their pay.)
Putting it simply: If there are two jobs on offer, one that requires a lot of hard work and effort - perhaps with a great deal of inconvenience also involved - and more men decide to do this job in order to get better pay, whereas more women choose to do a much easier and less demanding job that pays less, then it will be argued, successfully, that there must have been discrimination against women and that they are now entitled to years of back pay.
But if it was men who had chosen the easier jobs, they would not be able to make such a claim.
In other words, if men picked the harder better-paying jobs in the first place, then women who chose the easier jobs in the first place will still end up getting paid the same - without actually having to do the requisite work to justify better pay.
And this will happen solely on the grounds that more women than men chose the easier jobs!
And it is on the basis of throughly perverse notions of 'equality' such as this that men and the taxpayer are forever being cheated by corrupt politically-corrected feminist-dominated politicians who have no concern at all for decency and fair play, but who, instead, perpetually claim falsely that women are paid less than men for the 'same' jobs - something which is decidedly not true, and who - to add insult to injury - then have the nerve to claim that it is men who are discriminating against women in the workplace when, in fact, it is women themselves who are choosing the jobs that they do!
Also see, ...
Are Women Not Responsible Even For Their Work Choices?
Some BBC Propaganda Tricks
.
4 Comments:
Using the same law I don't think it would be unreasonable for **ALL MEN** to claim backdated pensions and national insurance credits. Currently a male has to work 5 years longer than a female to be able to claim a state pension and has to pay 5 years more national insurance contributions to get the same pension credits.
What i can't understand as your average member of the public keep hearing about women's issues?
Is this Equal Opportunities commision not really interested in equal opportunities at all?
men die earlier than women, but because they have the better paying jobs they pay more taxes throughout their lives.They do not, in the main, take extended breaks from work and, in the end pay for womens pensions which cost more because they live longer to enjoy the fruits of (mostly ) mens labour. So how come no politician is whining on about the inequality of men paying for the girls to live it up! Because they are all emasculated wimps in thrall to feminist pressure groupies (if they loom good as well, the mal politicos will be distracted as well) Nothing changed, then!
I get so angry seeing sexism against men in every area of modern life. I feel darn alienated from society knowing the government, the media, the education establishment, local authorities, etc treat men like second class citizens. Why dont more men see this? Too busy trying to get laid or too busy working or sucking up to women and the establishmnet or just stupid! People are so deluded it gets on my tits!
Post a Comment
<< Home