Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Trump Pulls Back Protections For Women Workers

Tekate

Tekate

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 11, 2013
Messages
7,570
That a woman would vote for Trump is beyond me. The republicans/conservative/freedom caucus are anti-women, anti-poverty, anti-immigration, just anti anti anti anything EXCEPT: war, guns, money, cutting taxes etc. yes, they are pro themselves basically. (them being people who make money on war, guns, stocks/bonds, weasel out of taxes.. those people). Yes there are republicans who fall in the middle, but they are few and FAR between today.

Trump Pulls Back Obama-Era Protections For Women Workers

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ons-women-workers-n741041?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma

With little notice, President Donald Trump recently signed an executive order that advocates say rolls back hard-fought victories for women in the workplace.

Tuesday's "Equal Pay Day" — which highlights the wage disparity between men and women — is the perfect time to draw more attention to the president's action, activists say.

On March 27, Trump revoked the 2014 Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces order then-President Barack Obama put in place to ensure that companies with federal contracts comply with 14 labor and civil rights laws. The Fair Pay order was put in place after a 2010 Government Accountability Office investigation showed that companies with rampant violations were being awarded millions in federal contracts.

In an attempt to keep the worst violators from receiving taxpayer dollars, the Fair Pay order included two rules that impacted women workers: paycheck transparency and a ban on forced arbitration clauses for sexual harassment, sexual assault or discrimination claims.

The rest can be found at the pointer.
 
What a dick!

... oh, that reminds me ...

pro choice555.png
 
Absolutely nothing he does surprises me anymore. The 52% of white women who voted for him are to blame. It's on them as far as I am concerned. He did a very good job of showing us exactly who he was while campaigning and they still chose to support him. I'm really worried about what this country will be like when he leaves office.
 
It's absolutely disgusting and wrong, and I have no patience for any person who voted him in. Worst mistake ever.
 
+1... that is, after voting for Hitler.
 
Yet a tiny few here STILL defend him. :nono:
 
Trump's approval rating fell to 35% today.
 
Why do Republicans/conservative men hate women so much??? I don't get it.
 
cmd2014 said:
Why do Republicans/conservative men hate women so much??? I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Why do conservative republican women seemingly hate women so much too :nono:
 
So if I said troll to some people in this thread that is completely appropriate yes?
 
Elliot86 said:
Why do conservative republican women seemingly hate women so much too :nono:
Click to expand...

They've absorbed the brainwashing that women are inferior.
... Gee ... wonder what entities teach that ... o_O
 
Was does Hitler and Hillary have in common - they both lost their elections. That is not how Hitler came to power.

And now you guys are listening to what ISIS has to say?
redwood66 said:
So if I said troll to some people in this thread that is completely appropriate yes?
Click to expand...
redwood66 said:
So if I said troll to some people in this thread that is completely appropriate yes?
Click to expand...

LOL
 
I actually wasn't being facetious or rhetorical. I genuinely don't understand where some of the anger towards women comes from. As a casual outside observer, the Bill O'Riley's of the world seem to have significant issues with women. (And Newt Gingrich and Mike Pence and Ted Cruz, and Breitbart as a whole). Trump seems more sexually inappropriate than angry, and I have to wonder who's pushing some of these policies and why. This is an issue that seems normal in US politics but is not present at all here.
 
Tekate said:
That a woman would vote for Trump is beyond me. The republicans/conservative/freedom caucus are anti-women, anti-poverty, anti-immigration, just anti anti anti anything EXCEPT: war, guns, money, cutting taxes etc. yes, they are pro themselves basically. (them being people who make money on war, guns, stocks/bonds, weasel out of taxes.. those people). Yes there are republicans who fall in the middle, but they are few and FAR between today.

Trump Pulls Back Obama-Era Protections For Women Workers

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ons-women-workers-n741041?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma

With little notice, President Donald Trump recently signed an executive order that advocates say rolls back hard-fought victories for women in the workplace.

Tuesday's "Equal Pay Day" — which highlights the wage disparity between men and women — is the perfect time to draw more attention to the president's action, activists say.

On March 27, Trump revoked the 2014 Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces order then-President Barack Obama put in place to ensure that companies with federal contracts comply with 14 labor and civil rights laws. The Fair Pay order was put in place after a 2010 Government Accountability Office investigation showed that companies with rampant violations were being awarded millions in federal contracts.

In an attempt to keep the worst violators from receiving taxpayer dollars, the Fair Pay order included two rules that impacted women workers: paycheck transparency and a ban on forced arbitration clauses for sexual harassment, sexual assault or discrimination claims.

The rest can be found at the pointer.
Click to expand...

If I am understanding this correctly a new EO was needed in 2014 because the Federal Government was not doing its job in vetting companies before awarding federal contracts to make sure they had not violated laws that already exist? Wouldn't it be better to tell your agencies they need to do a more thorough job of ensuring they are eligible to accept a contract?
 
Last edited:
cmd2014 said:
I actually wasn't being facetious or rhetorical. I genuinely don't understand where some of the anger towards women comes from. As a casual outside observer, the Bill O'Riley's of the world seem to have significant issues with women. (And Newt Gingrich and Mike Pence and Ted Cruz, and Breitbart as a whole). Trump seems more sexually inappropriate than angry, and I have to wonder who's pushing some of these policies and why. This is an issue that seems normal in US politics but is not present at all here.
Click to expand...

cmd my comment was not to you at all.
 
35% approval rating?

THAT HIGH?
That makes me want to hurl ...

Screen Shot 2017-04-04 at 8.30.07 PM.png
 
What I would like to know is why the article speaks about Walmart and Fox/Oreilly when the EO Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces only addresses those companies that contract to do work for the Federal Government? I care about women's issues but this article seems to be to whip people up.
 
cmd2014 said:
I can see that thanks. I missed some of the middle.
Click to expand...

I think you and I can have a decent conversation even if we do not agree. I just made the thread much shorter by using the tools we have here on PS.
 
So after reading the 2014 EO and the GAO report it seems the EO was setting policy/ for the Fed. Gov. to follow to ensure that contractors follow existing labor and OSHA laws. I am not sure how removing this affects women? The laws are still in effect.

Here is the EO so can somebody else check it out?

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.go.../executive-order-fair-pay-and-safe-workplaces

Basically I want to read info myself and the article does not refer to any sections in the EO where they got that reasoning that women are now thrown under the bus if it is removed. The GAO report refers to OSHA violations where people died or were hurt, firing for union participation.
 
Last edited:
redwood66 said:
If I am understanding this correctly a new EO was needed in 2014 because the Federal Government was not doing its job in vetting companies before awarding federal contracts to make sure they had not violated laws that already exist? Wouldn't it be better to tell your agencies they need to do a more thorough job of ensuring they are eligible to accept a contract?
Click to expand...

Why is it important why the act went into place?
 
redwood66 said:
More info. I am finding very interesting stuff on this. It appears most of Obama's EO has been blocked by a judge since October 2016 anyway. The article in the OP doesn't tell us that info.

http://www.natlawreview.com/article...safe-workplaces-executive-order-blocked-texas

Injunction

http://www.affirmativeactionlawadvi...loads/sites/602/2016/10/order-granting-pi.pdf

The EO has been called the Blacklisting rule.
Click to expand...

Obama was trying with this EO to ensure that fair pay is more open, more transparent so that women and minorities can ensure they are being paid fairly. The usual old boy network of DC (republicans) blocked it and now Trump has rescinded it.. Women lose.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/eeoc-pay-discrimination-obama/433926/
 
I'm just going to thumbs up. I'm sick of explaining things to people who won't hear it.
 
Tekate said:
Why is it important why the act went into place?
Click to expand...
Curiosity and there is always two sides to every story.

Tekate said:
Obama was trying with this EO to ensure that fair pay is more open, more transparent so that women and minorities can ensure they are being paid fairly. The usual old boy network of DC (republicans) blocked it and now Trump has rescinded it.. Women lose.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/eeoc-pay-discrimination-obama/433926/
Click to expand...

The EO in the OP was only for those companies that contract with the federal government. And it was blocked in Texas.
 
Red, I agree that the article does little to inform, and that doesn't seem to be the purpose.
There are many articles that explain the pay gap. This one is not the best, but very brief.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/harvard-prof.-takes-down-gender-wage-gap-myth/article/2580405

The 83% figure is comparing apples to oranges. Every female worker to every male worker, period.
I read, in another article, that young, childless females in large cities make significantly more than young males.
Now the sexual harassment part is another matter. Women should not be contractually compelled to accept whatever an arbitrator says, obviously. Is that really what the repeal means? Did this Obama order really solve this issue?
 
True AnnaH. I also believe that removing the ability to pay based on merit and production adversely affects businesses. There are many things that are to be considered when looking at pay. Those companies that pay less solely based on gender are breaking an already existing law.
 
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top