Unintended Consequences

Today I read an article on the internet regarding a sex discrimination lawsuit.  This is the first time I had heard of this particular lawsuit, and all of my information comes from that one long, detailed article.  From the article, it's impossible for me to discern whether or not the lawsuit is justified.  A woman worked for a large corporation, rising through the ranks to a vice president there, and earning over a million dollars per year.  The article states that in her final year employed with the company, she reported fourteen million dollars of income, including stock options that she cashed in.

In going over the paperwork after the company was sold, the woman realized that a man who had previously worked for the company -- a man she identifies as her "predecessor" -- earned significantly more money than she did.  The company contends, however, that the man's job was different than the job occupied by the woman, involving far more responsibility, and that both the man and the woman were paid fairly for the particular duties that they performed.  The company further contends that the woman was paid a salary similar to what she would have been paid for performing the same duties with a different company.  The woman disagrees, and argues that throughout her employment with the company she was subjected to different treatment than the male employees.

From the information available to me, I have no idea whether or not the lawsuit is justified.  It's always difficult to compare the pay of two different employees, since employees rarely have precisely the same qualifications, backgrounds, and talents, and since employees rarely perform precisely the same jobs.  I think that most people would agree that two identically-qualified and identically-capable people performing the same job in the same region at the same time deserve the same pay, regardless of gender -- but in the real world, there are an infinite number of variables that complicate the issue.

What strikes me, however, was my initial response after reading the article.  I immediately thought to myself, "Under the circumstances, it would be a foolish risk for a major corporation to hire a woman, if they could find a man that could perform the job just as well.  Why would any corporation open themselves up to the risk of a sex discrimination lawsuit?  It would be irresponsible."

I am not proud of these thoughts, and believe that a person's gender should have no role in hiring decisions.  At the same time, it's difficult to argue with my initial reaction to the article.  Why WOULD a corporation take the risk of hiring a woman, when the risk could be avoided by simply not hiring her in the first place?  Of course, then there is the risk of being sued for not hiring her.  Here again, since no two people are precisely identical, it's always difficult to say which candidate is truly the best for the job.

I can take some solace in realizing that I will never be involved in the hiring/firing decisions for any company.  I have never had any employees, and probably never will.  In terms of the people that I pay to perform tasks -- people like doctors and lawyers and barbers -- I have dealt with both men and women in each role, and I have never been aware of their gender playing any role in the job performance, or in the fees I have paid them.  Crucially, though, all of these people set their own fees, or at least, they send me a bill, and I pay it.  I do not decide how much their job is worth.

Still, I keep coming back to my response to the article.  After reading the article, it truly DOES seem irresponsible to even CONSIDER hiring a woman for an important position, and therefore risking a major sex-discrimination lawsuit.  And I doubt that I am the only one who would come to that same conclusion.  So, by filing the lawsuit, the original plaintiff ends up discouraging employers from hiring female executives.

I am NOT saying she was wrong to file the lawsuit.  I AM saying this is a classic case of unintended consequences.  By filing the lawsuit, she is contributing to sex discrimination in the workplace -- the very thing she is supposedly fighting against.

I have no answers here.  Truth is complicated.

NOTE:  This is my first blog entry in a LONG time.  The reasons for my long absence, appropriately enough, are complicated ...