Suseonline,

I am surprised you work in the private sector. Also, that if you do, you are not expecting and negotiating for pay and conditions commensurate with your abilities and performance and not the average that puts the good and the slack in the same bag together. Honestly, why strive for superior performance in that situation? I would leave in a heartbeat and let others carry the dead weights of 'average', 'sticking to the (minimum) job description' and 'not so interested' employees.

The whole idea is to get the pay and conditions you are due, which must mean different take home pay and entitlements. Some if us like stretch targets and we are self starters who look for extra responsibility.

Numbers as in statistics are never an answer and they are not intended to be, just the possible basis for more questions. You need to be careful to inform yourself of any stated limitations on interpretation of results.

The figure quote refers to 'average'. I have spent the odd bit of time explaining to you why differences can occur: that two men working under the same generic job description can be paid differently, according to what the bring to the job, which includes commitment to go the extra distance, which often implies unpaid overtime.

There is also a very good link provided earlier and you might try to understand what is described these because it does apply here too most would imagine.

Frankly I am not surprised by self-serving media releases put out by any government agency. What I would like to believe however that there are those in the scientific community who would take them to task for apparent findings that really deserve a lot of conditions being applied and a lot more interpretation.

To be blunt, the averages are 'interesting', which means (to researchers) ensure you set them aside as probably wrong and misleading when examining the results.

Numbers may not be wrong, but shallow analysis usually is.

Suseonline please go to http://www.pistonheads.com & check out a thread, Classic from the mrs! It should give you some idea of the lack of practical knowledge displayed by many of your gender who are considered educated.

Not only is it hilariously funny, it is an education in it's own right.

Incidentally, foxy, I'm sure you would enjoy it.

It is an English site, & it just may indicate our education system is not quite as bad as we often think.

Suse,
I know you don't read articles or watch videos that you think you might disagree with so here's a picture to look at, it's easy to comprehend if you understand scientific terms such as "frequency" and "mean:
http://goo.gl/PGwBIQ

I love the internet, I go and make a cuppa and a new video appears on my Google+ and surprise! It's relevant to this discussion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8o0euhM6bjg#t=404

OTB, I never said that I personally made less money than my male counterparts.
Nurses have a good Union, and as a general rule, we get paid roughly the same wherever we work in Australia.

Government Hospitals and community organisations actually pay a little better than Private ones, but you get better salary packaging benefits in the latter.

However, I am very aware that women in other industries are not so well off.

I agree that official statistics, with general or average numbers, are often given in many studies, including those for studies on murder, child neglect, single mothers, and domestic violence etc.

At the end of the day though, they show more truth than the biased opinions of the everyday person who may have other agendas on their minds.

Having watched that video in which the male speaker criticised Emma Watson for asking men to help, I'll just refer back to my earlier post about the all male committee deciding to grade a position at a lower pay level when they realised they would most likely get women applicants (who were likely to be more highly qualified than male applicants).

This was not a situation where women could take action - there were no women on the selection committee. A male did attempt, though unsuccessfully, to speak up for the potential women applicants. It might have worked if other men had joined him. There are still situations like this where women alone cannot change things - eg. how can women get elected to all male boards if the men are not prepared to facilitate this?