In 1963, the president of the United States passed an act called the Equal Pay Act, which required that work places and pay be equal according to the job done. This never truly took off. I've seen statistics that say that there are jobs that men get paid more in, there are jobs women get paid more in. My question is, how do you expect to get equal pay for difference in sex when there has always been sex discrimination, on both sides? Look at it this way, the daily assumption is that MEN are always the ones guilty of the following three crimes:
1. Rape
2. Domestic Abuse
3. Other forms of sexual abuse (not including rape).

Guess what? Those are not exclusively male crimes, so how can you assume anything?

I've been told in the past that men are swine. Men are this, or that. Well, what about the crimes of women? A woman commits domestic abuse, she gets congratulated? That's not justice, that's bull crap. Women are not perfect, no, far from it. It's okay though, neither are men. No human being, person in the flesh, is perfect. We make mistakes. They happen for a reason.

You recover from mistakes. You screwed up, best thing to do after screwing up is to hold your head up high, admit that you made a mistake and learn from it. That's how you become wise, that's how you meet God's plan for you. God doesnt deal in black and white. He'll always present you with choices, and let you decide. If you mess up, He lets you suffer the consequences and then He saves you and hopes you learn from the mess up.

God saves, yes, but He only saves those who believe, accept, and do His work. Just calling yourself a believer is not enough, never has been enough, and never will be enough.

I was emailed, eventually, by a Department of Labor spokesperson. I was given answers to two questions, and you know what I think of the answers? They're skewed and flawed to help someone persuade another into a similar way of thinking. Thank you for the answers, they proved slightly enlightening, and they were meant for public eyes. I informed the DOL that I intended to use the statemtents in  this blog, and I will of course, allow you all to interperate what the department spokesperson said.

My original email:

I was wondering, for blog purposes, if you could clarify some things
from the web chat. My first question pertains to how jobs would be put
into similar categories. What skills, education necessary, job
descriptions would be taken into account? My next is as a male employee,
what can I do to promote equal wages? Lastly, I would like to know,
hypothetically, a woman is hired to do a specific job, like say
secretary. There is another woman who is a secretary, but has been there
for a year longer. Both have same education, the new hire is younger and
more experienced with computers. Who would have the hire pay in such a
situation?

Reply:


There is more than one statute that might apply here. According to the EEOC, which enforces the Equal Pay Act, that statute requires that men and women in the same workplace be given equal pay for equal work. The jobs need not be identical, but they must be substantially equal. Job content (not job titles) determines whether jobs are substantially equal.  (EEOC guidance http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/equalcompensation.cfm.)

Under Title VII, determining whether pay discrimination exists uses a more flexible approach.  Compensation discrimination can take many forms – from paying women less than men for doing the same job, to discriminating against minorities in promotions or opportunities to earn overtime. Even when base salaries and wages are fair, workers can still experience discrimination in other types of pay, like bonuses or commissions. For this reason, courts consistently state in judicial decisions applying Title VII that there is no single way to prove compensation discrimination, and no particular limits on the kinds of evidence or information that might be relevant to proving discrimination in a particular case.  OFCCP has talked about this in its Notice of Rescission of the 2006 pay discrimination guidance documents:   
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-28/pdf/2013-04675.pdf

What does this tell you? They expect their existing programs, which have been in effect for 50 years, to work when according to their own information, THEY HAVE YET TO WORK!

I'm not even bothering to go to the transcript of the chat. This is a joke, and I hope the DOL realizes this. I'm sure they've been waiting on bended knees about this post since they know about it and where to find it.

As promised I will never reveal who I received this information from however, I can say I believe that they take us all for idiots.

My blog was never intended for me to become a political activist but I feel like I am slowly approaching that level.

Thank you for reading, have a good day.

AFC East draft review 2013

Ok, so allow me to say this: My mock draft for the 2013 NFL draft wasn’t nearly as bad in retrospect. I did not post my draft order, and that’s fine since I had Chance Warmack going number one overall. The silver lining is that number 27 overall was the only pick that was correct. That is DeAndre Hopkins to the Houston Texans.

Now I will voice my opinion on how each team did in the first round, and draft over all. There will be some biasedness considering events that occurred before the draft in free agency. Yes, I’m talking to you Buffalo…. It will be long; however I will be breaking it up into Conference, Division, and Alphabetical order by city name. I will begin with the AFC East, and make separate posts for each. As we get closer to the season, I will have season predictions, my playoff predictions, and my Super Bowl winner. Without further ado; the AFC East:

Buffalo Bills:

First Round: D-. EJ Manuel (16^th), QB, Florida State

Overall: D

Buffalo, let me just say that you should never have EVER let Ryan Fitzpatrick leave. He was a serviceable quarterback until Johnny Heisman became available in two years. EJ Manuel isn’t even the best QB in an extremely thin group of QB’s. I looked at the season statistics. Buffalo seriously needed Offensive, Defensive linemen, and a WR. They only addressed their need of WR, and it was too late to get an instant starter by that time. This is a complete and utter bombing, worthy of a lower grade, but I’m being generous because it is still truly too early to tell how it will play out.

Miami Dolphins:

First Round: B. Dion Jordan (3^rd), DE, Oregon

Overall: B.

Overall, the Dolphin’s draft didn’t have anyone jump out at me as “OMG STAR” but they did definitely do a better job addressing needs than the Bills did. It’s possible they could have drafted someone who was a higher need at the time, particularly on the offensive line, but an unsung need for Miami was defensive line. They could have addressed TE earlier but needed CB more. Not bad, Miami should improve from this draft. I still don’t expect them to do better than 2^nd place in their division, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they got 3^rd.

New England Patriots:

First Round: No first round pick.

Overall: B+.

New England has a wonderful history of excellent drafts. Doesn’t stop me from disliking the air they breathe. They did a good job addressing the loss of Welker, and repairing a depleted and exposed defense. Unfortunately, history (oh, the ever loveable history) is against second round pick, Jamie Collins, OLB, Southern Miss.

New York Jets:

First Round: A-. Dee Milliner, CB, Alabama (9^th) and Sheldon Richardson, DT, Missouri (13^th)

Overall: B+.

The Jets may have actually had a decent draft. They addressed the loss of Revis Island, brought in fresh blood for the defensive line, and possibly brought in a new starting QB. I would rather have seen the pick used on Geno Smith used for something slightly more important, say a LB or RB, however you generally cannot go wrong with first round talent in the second round.