So there’s the gender pay gap and then there’s the other nonsense

0925_pay-800x480Not only do women make less than men all the way up the pay scale, but female executives tend to be financially penalized more when the market or the company takes a dip. From Liberty Street Economics:

Compensation of female executives is more exposed to declines in firm value and less exposed to increases in firm value than males’. We find that a 1 percent rise in firm value is associated with a 13 percent rise in firm-specific wealth for female executives and a 44 percent rise for male executives. Conversely, a 1 percent decline in firm value is associated with a 63 percent decline in firm-specific wealth for female executives and a 33 percent decline for males.

Oh, awesome.


Published by datingjesus

Just another one of God's children.

Join the Conversation


  1. I’m wondering why the NYFed sample period stops at 2005. The S&P Execucomp Database doesn’t stop there. It is updated after the end of each filing period, which, I believe, is in March of each year.

    I’m also wondering why the sample period started at 1992. Before 2000, the numbers of women in top 5 executive positions in either the S&P or Fortune Top 1000 were negligible. Which brings up another question: Are the researchers using the entire S&P 1500, the top 1000 or just the top 500? They don’t say.

    I’m curious about the sample because…
    –When you look at Women in S&P 500 Companies as compiled by Catalyst 2013-2015, the percentages of women’s representation are very different. These numbers could change, obviously, when factoring another 500 or 1,000 companies. Which is why it would be nice to know the number of companies employed in the NYFed sample. And why the sample stopped at 2005, well before the Crash Economy.
    –There’s not only been a significant change in the number of women in top 5 executive positions since 1992, and even since 2005, there’s also been significant changes to determining and reporting compensation within the Executive Suite post-Dodd/Frank, (2010), and during Quantitative Easing.

    When reporting on who is getting screwed, where, how and by whom, I think it would be valuable to separate the bottom four executive positions from the CEO position. Especially when examining the “pay for performance” factor in executive compensation historically. Especially when considering reports like this that show women in top executive positions make incredible amounts of money for their employers and stockholders.

    I’m not questioning NYFed conclusions about their limited sample. (It’s not surprising really given the time frame employed.) I just think it would be nice to know if that trend continues in a more contemporary environment.

  2. Completely awful! We’ve been talking about this for years…decades….and still?

    And for more nonsense, we have individual stories. Here is one I read recently. Granted, this touches on other aspects of employment and addresses a case involving awful Amazon. Still, the same result – negative impact on women and lack of or very few female executives. Even more difficult to measure fairness in compensation of female and male executives when there are no female executives. Dammit, Amazon!

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: