A study says so. Therefore, it must be true!
Are you concerned about the gender pay gap? Better act fast. According to an article in The New York Times, the pay gap starts way before men and women enter the work force.
In fact, it starts way before they graduate from high school.
In fact, it may start before elementary school.
How do we know this? Because BusyKid, a smartphone "chore app," says so.
According to its FAQs, BusyKid allows parents to list chores and kids to check them off when they're completed, and it also provides for cashless transactions. In other words, parents can pay their kids' allowances, and the kids can collect and even invest their money, through the app. For an annual fee of $14.95, the whole family can even share a BusyKid Spend Card (prepaid Visa card).
Are users of a chore-and-allowance app representative of U.S. families as a whole?
In any event, BusyKid says that its data on 10,000 families who use the app showed that boys got $13.80 a week for doing chores around the house, while girls got only $6.71.
Holy Toledo! That's quite a gender allowance gap!
Since this study actually made it into The New York Times, it's worth pointing out everything that's missing from it before we start getting demands for Congress to pass an "Equal Allowance Act":
No. 1: As already noted, we don't know whether the 10,000 families who use the BusyKid app are representative of the population of U.S. kids who do household chores and get allowances.
No. 2: We don't know whether the chores performed by the BusyKid boys are the same as, or comparable with, the chores performed by the BusyKid girls.
No. 3: Indeed, we don't even have a breakdown of the number of boys who were included in the study versus the number of girls. Hmmmm.
No. 4: There is no breakdown by age. One would expect that older kids -- who can mow the lawn and do other "grown-up" chores, and who also have more expensive forms of amusement -- might receive bigger allowances than younger ones. (In fact, BusyKid itself says its pre-loaded chore lists are age-appropriate.) What if most of the boys who use BusyKid are in their teens and most of the girls are in third grade?
No. 5: There is no indication that the study controlled for family income. How could it? Presumably, BusyKid would not have access to that information. Failure to control for family income is a fatal flaw in an "equal pay" study involving kids.
No. 6: Most importantly, there is no indication that the study controlled for family, period. As in, "The Smiths, who have four daughters, give their daughters $0.50 a week, but only if the girls make their beds, vaccuum the living room, mow the lawn, prepare one dinner a week, and do the dishes on the nights that they aren't cooking." Meanwhile, "The Joneses, who have four sons, give their boys $50 a week if they remember to flush at least once a day. Exceptions are made when, in the opinion of the boys, extenuating circumstances exist."
Presumably, the Smiths would be equally tough on their sons if they had any, and the Joneses would be equally easy on their daughters if they had any. Or maybe not. But you can't use a disparity between two different families to prove sex discrimination.
In short, it appears that this study proves as little as the statistic that shows adult women in the workforce earn only 80-some cents for every dollar that a man earns. (Which is true, but as you know if you regularly read this blog, this statistic is meaningless because it does not control for position held, industry, employer, educational background, time in the workforce, part-time status, full-time status, geography, work history, or anything else except whether the workers are male or female.)
I am not a gender-pay-gap denier -- the pay gap exists -- but proponents have yet to prove to me that any significant portion of it is due to sex discrimination by employers. This allowance study doesn't change that.
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010