Published On: Tue, Apr 24th, 2012

EEOC Asks for Teen Advice to Solve the Wage Gap

By: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is asking teenagers to weigh in on the heavy issues of equal pay and wage disparity.

On April 26, 2012, the EEOC will recognize the 20th anniversary of Take Your Child to Work Day by inviting teenagers to its Denver Field Office to participate in a dialogue for solutions on how to bridge the gender wage gap in America.

Suggestions from this forum will be sent to the National Equal Pay Enforcement Task Force in Washington, D.C. EEOC Chair Jacqueline Berrien is a member of that body, which is headed by Vice President Joe Biden.

“The EEOC believes that teenagers between the ages of 14 and 18 represent an unbiased group that may have the ability to solve a problem that has plagued generations,” said Denver EEOC Field Director Nancy Sienko.  “We want to hear what they have to say.”

The forum will take place from 1:00 pm to 3:30 pm at the EEOC’s Denver Field Office, 303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 410, Denver.  Participants will be asked to sign their names to a registration sheet, which will be kept for historical purposes.

All participants must register in advance at: Bring Your Teenager to Work Day

The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws against employment discrimination. The EEOC’s Denver Field Office has jurisdiction for Colorado and Wyoming. Further information is available at

About the Author

- Editor

Displaying 1 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Male Matters says:

    The wage gap between parents and working teens who live at home is caused pretty much by the same thing that causes the gender wage gap.

    Women’s “77 cents to men’s dollar” is arrived at by comparing the sexes’ median incomes. It refers to the point at which 50 percent of workers earn above this figure and the other 50 below (which means, among other things, that a lot of women outearn a lot of men). It doesn’t take into account the number of hours worked each week, experience, seniority, training, education or even the job description itself. It compares all women to all men, not people in the same job with the same experience. So a veteran male software designer’s salary is weighed against a first-year female teacher’s income.

    Now consider:

    No law yet has closed the gender wage gap — not the 1963 Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, not Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, not the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, not the 1991 amendments to Title VII, not affirmative action (which has benefited mostly white women, the group most vocal about the wage gap –, not diversity, not the countless state and local laws and regulations, not the horde of overseers at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and not the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act…. Nor will a “paycheck fairness” law work.

    That’s because pay-equity advocates continue to overlook the effects of female AND male behavior:

    Despite the 40-year-old demand for women’s equal pay, millions of wives still choose to have no pay at all. In fact, according to Dr. Scott Haltzman, author of “The Secrets of Happily Married Women,” stay-at-home wives, including the childless who represent an estimated 10 percent, constitute a growing niche. “In the past few years,” he says in a CNN report at, “many women who are well educated and trained for career tracks have decided instead to stay at home.” (“Census Bureau data show that 5.6 million mothers stayed home with their children in 2005, about 1.2 million more than did so a decade earlier….” at If indeed more women are staying at home, perhaps it’s because feminists and the media have told women for years that female workers are paid less than men in the same jobs — so why bother working if they’re going to be penalized and humiliated for being a woman. Yet, if “greedy, profit-obsessed” employers could get away with paying women less than men for the same work, they would not hire a man – ever.)

    As full-time mothers or homemakers, stay-at-home wives earn zero. How can they afford to do this while in many cases living in luxury? Because they’re supported by their husband, an “employer” who pays them to stay at home.

    Feminists, government, and the media ignore what this obviously implies: If millions of wives are able to accept no wages and live as well as their husbands, millions of other wives are able to:

    -accept low wages
    -refuse overtime and promotions
    -choose jobs based on interest first, wages second — men tend to do the opposite
    -take more unpaid days off
    -avoid uncomfortable wage-bargaining (
    -work part-time instead of full-time (“According to a 2009 UK study for the Centre for Policy Studies, only 12 percent of the 4,690 women surveyed wanted to work full time”: See also an Australian report at


    Women are able to make these choices because they are supported — or anticipate being supported — by a husband who must earn more than if he’d chosen never to marry. (Still, even many men who shun marriage, unlike their female counterparts, feel their self worth is tied to their net worth.) This is how MEN help create the wage gap. If the roles were reversed so that men raised the children and women raised the income, men would average lower pay than women.

    Afterword: The power in money is not in earning it (there is only responsibility, sweat, and stress in earning money). The power in money is in SPENDING it. And, Warren Farrell says in The Myth of Male Power at, “Women control consumer spending by a wide margin in virtually every consumer category.” (Women’s control over spending, adds Farrell, gives women control over TV programs.) “A recent research study revealed that the average woman spends eight years of her life shopping [spending] — over 300 shopping trips per year. Men, only a fraction of that.” -

    Excerpted from “Will the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Help Women?” at

Search Jobs