the value of spectrum is raising ahead of the incentive auction so for a variety of reasons a number of companies have consolidated and bought stations across the county. sinclair broadcasting has been aggressive in terms of snatching up the smaller broadcasters. >> host: how many television stations does sinclair broadcasting own across the country? >> guest: i believe something in excess of a hundred stations. they have a number of joint sales agreements and they will likely be effected by this. in some cases, they can get waivers if they can prove they are necessary to keep them afloat but in most cases they will have align and hire people or figure out how to go. we may see them sold. >> host: can sinclair broadcasting own an abc and an nbc in the same city? >> guest: that is against the rules. you can only one one station in the large mack market. you are only allowed to own one out of the abc, nbc, fox, and cbs station in every market. when sinclair made an agreement to buy a number of stations, when they buy a package of stations sometimes they have a station in that market. that is an issue in the all britain case. and before they would set up a sidecar deal. they would find someone who would be the owner but everything was handled by the larger company like sinclair. because this has been banned they will have to restructure and in some craases see the station sold. >> host: the national administration said this will not be served by this decision. what is going to happen next? can there be an appeal? does this take effect right away? >> guest: most people expect a lawsuit and they will argue the fcc is making an arbitrary distinct here and in the past th the fcc greenlighted these transmissions. however, tom wheeler has a ba background in the cable industry so it isn't surprising to many he has taken this action. the fcc took another action tat their most resent meeting where they banned stations from teaming up and negotiating with cable providers and satellite for money. the cable companies are com plaining and tom wheeler responder. >> host: and gautham nagesh what is the timing for the unwinding of the sidecar? >> guest: they have two years. but they have waivers they can show that show they can not serve the public and smaller stations may get waivers approved. if the station is owned by a minority or shows it boosted diversity in the media they might be able to get a waver in that instance. that is available for armstrong williams who owns two stations that have joint sales agreements with sinclair. for other stations, they will have to unwind the agreements and the language of the commissioners indicate that most applications will be denied. they will do so in 90 days so we will have a good idea of what will happen in the next few months. >> what is the significance this was a partisan vote? two democrats in favor and two republicans against it. >> guest: i think that is reflective of the philosophy and the arguments that have been made by the broadcasters. it isn't necessarily a partisan issue per se but it has become one because the broadcasters have been aggressively lobbying against the changes. this is a blow for the largest companies that have accumulated the stations. it is going to be expensive. commissioner clyburn was sympathetic to the concerns especially for the minority stations and that is why the waivers are approved. the democrats backed wheeler and that is not surprising given his position. but there was definitely a lot of blow back from the broadcasters. >> host: there is only one african-american station owner in the country. is that one? >> guest: there is armstrong williams who has two stations he owns and i believe there is one other station owner in chicago and that person had previously marked multiple racial categories so it wasn't clear they were african-american. i believe at any rate that is down to 19. and that is a sign to many that diversity among ownership is a real concern right now particularly given that we are in the second term of the first african-american president and we are probably faced with the lowest point in terms of media diversity ownership in the broadcast business we have seen in the last two decades. >> host: gautham nagesh covers station coverage for "the wall street journal." and joining us now is armstrong williams. how does this decision affect you? >> obviously i am encouraged by commissioner clyburn's concerns about diversity. if anyone knows my history, i have always been someone to put myself out as a minority and celebrate diversity. i believe that either you can afford and have the relationships whether you can sustain it. i think it is wonderful think people from all walks of life can own stations but it is a very expensive business. i instructed my lawyers to file the waiver that will be done this week. i believe them to be sincere and if they are accepted we will be exempt from this process. i think it is much more than about me. as someone who is perceived as a minority owner and operates two stations in myrtle beach, south carolina and flint, michigan, it is overwhelming. we when we were trying to secure financing jp morgan said there was no way they would loan us the money unless we got a big guy to back the loan. luckily the owner of sinclair broadcasting i had known for 15 years and we talked about me owning stations for the last ten years. i was not that interested because of what it would require. $1.8 for myrtle beach and $1.4 million in flint for the license and what it cost to operate isn't something you can imaginm. >> host: could you have done it independently? can that be done? >> stand alones can't exist. that is my many can't make. it isn't just minorities. wives, women, people of all strives can't do it. this is a game for people like the sinclair broadcasting and the big boys. if you are not one of those, it is very difficult as a stand alone to compete for advertising dollars. advertisers like to buy big contracts. we are lucky that the shared agreements, sinclair broadcasting goes in and negotiates these and the transmission fees. the cable operators would take us off their systems. we would not exist. it is important we have someone with a proven track record in programming to be there and fight for us. if the banks were to loan me the money, let's just say we were to unwind my stations that exist now. in four months the bank would come to me and my loan wouldn't exist and i would go belly up in four months and i speak for all small broadcasters that are in the same predicament. >> host: what is your shared sales agreement and joint sales agreement with sinclair broadcasting? the sidecar as our guest spoke about. >> everything sidecar, joint service agreement, insured service agreement is not the same. it is very important those listening understand this. normally for me, i have total control over the programming for my stations. sinclair broadcasting says we want to put this on and if i don't like it i can veto it. there is nothing else that can be said. the revenues, 85% come to me and 15% goes to sinclair broadcasting. that 85% pay for the entire operation of that station. let me give you real numbers. in flint, michigan, it cost me 6.5 million a year to run that station. that is almost $19,000-$20,000 a day. and remember this, i am in debt. i had to get jp morgan to get had loan. >> host: the $50 million? >> yes. my payment to them is probably $138,000 a month. so people say i got the loan but that is debt. you have to improve the programming, the operation. i am all over the country for the last several months. catering to the local market is very important. i agree with the fcc in that. in the myrtle beach market we have been doing town hall meetings where we are not paid and no advertising or sponsors but it is something we want to do. we did a town hall meeting on affordable care act and just within the last week we went back and did a town hall meeting on domestic violence where people called in and real life-threatening situations and we had the chief of police and the attorney general from the state of south carolina, mike wilson, and sandra rose, the chief of police, was there to help people out of the flightening situations because south carolina leads the country in domestic violence. we take the situations to the community and empower them. in flint we do shows because their budget is so cut to the edge. local police, city council members and the community, and we show we care about them. we are active, we are involved. our myrtle beach station, which didn't have news and that is where you make the money in the local market. that news operation cost us almost $8,000. this isn't cheap. it is not for the faint of heart. billy huggins, my general manager, put that together. without sinclair broadcasting i could not afford this. ice destroyed our generator and we were off the air for 16 hours. it was $400,000 to get a generator. you cannot calculate these expenses. i don't care about the wealth i have been blessed with there is no way i could survive this. this is why when my lawyers file with the fcc for the waivers we are confidant. i am involved with my general manager and becky in flint, michigan, we are on the phone daily. in the flint market we asked them to introduce myself to the staff and we asked why we cannot compete and it is because we don't have boots on the ground. producers, camera operators, anchor people, and six staffers that were necessary just to give us an opportunity in the market. that was almost $350,000 for those positions. you don't have that kind of money when you go into the situation with debt but sinclair broadcasting owns 168 stations and they are the largest owner in the country. they are supportive and encourage me and they are not involved. i deal with staff and we are making progress. i wish youk could see the moral that has been lifted. a lot of people go in and gut them and leave nothing and just take the money out. but for sinclair broadcasting we are in the tv business. i am in this for the long term because south carolina is my home town. that is what attracted me to this business. when david smith said i think i have the key to get you in and he showed me the myrtle beach station. and i said i have to do it. >> host: 15% of the revenue goes to sinclair broadcasting. >> and 85% stays with us. >> host: do you consult with david smith? >> no, it is totally independent. if i want wisdom or advice with things i am doing, i will ask. but the good news is, and this is a blessing, it is my history/background, earlier on in my career i was the ceo of the renaissance network, and i was there for 3-4 years. i have been involved with sinclair broadcasting for programming. that is the outfit that airs my national television show that has been on the air for a long time. so i have been involved in programming and developing content and manageing soul things. i bring the programming, the localism like the town hall meetings and other things that speak directly to the community. i heard "the wall street journal" say earlier a lot of guys are entrepreneur and friends that don't have experience. that is not my case. i am a broadcaster. it is my history and where identify put most of my history in my career. >> host: lauren wilson from "free press" moposted abou you saying i cannot let this rhetoric go unchecked, sinclair broadcasting provides with technical, promotional, back office, sales and related services and sinclair broadcasting also has the right to provide your company stations with up to 25 hours of programming, 25 hours happens to equal $14.88 percent of the 168 hour week and fcc rules already require ownership attributions in instances where broadcasters cast more than 15% of a station >> that doesn't apply for us. she has her facts wrong. they talk about why minorities can't can't get into the industry as a lack of capital. without sinclair broadcasting's support we could not do what dwi and as a business man, i am not apologizing that. i don't want to go abrupt or short change my employees so i consider sinclair broadcasting a blessing. i would say this also, without joint sales agreements and shared service agreements minorities in the broadcast industry is non-existent. this is the only vehicle that makes sure others have a shot at becoming a broadcaster in this country. there is no other vehicle. and the numbers are abyss million. they are failing because of money. capital. they just don't have it. it bleeds them to death. they say i cannot take it anymore. i want to do the business but i cannot afford it. with sinclair broadcasting i will not have that problem. >> host: after the decisio decision, "free press" said this statement. how much of this is about race? >> let me think about that -- i don't think about that much. i don't think this is about race. ideology and affordability and spectrum space and cable owners don't want to pay us for our content. they want our content for free but they will pay espn $6-$7 per prescri prescriber and they pay us 67 cents. it has nothing to do with rates. if you want to know the bottom line, follow the money trail. >> host: your friend and washington news contributor said my suspicion is that liberals at the fcc who claim to be interested in promoted diverse broadcastship lose interest if the owner is a conservative like armstrong williams. >> jaun is my friend and i appreciate him saying the opportunity given the history of the country t is important for minorties, particularly blacks to see america is a place where you can prosper. wheth when al sharpton was getting the talk on the news, it gave me hope. maybe some black girl will see al sharpton and it will give her home she can be on the will. people need to see themselves and what they call their own to achieve the american dream. and i see the reaction from young people. they think i am so cool because they watch television and they think the fact you can own tv is a big deal. i don't think all of the small stations look like me and share my politics. but they are just as impacted. >> host: did you meet with the fcc commissioners before this vote? and what is the next step for you? >> we met with commissioner clyburn. >> host: that was the only one of the five? why? >> i didn't give much thought and weight to meeting with the commissioners because i was returning around trying to adjust to the n new ownership. so i didn't have time to hold my head above water. but i was seeing the broadcasters going in meeting with the commissioners and i said i should do the same. the commissioner and i share roots from south carolina and i asked for the meeting. we addressed our concerns. she didn't say much. she was very open you could tell. it was my first time at the fcc. >> host: what is the application process like to get an fcc license? >> only my lawyers can understand that. they are still reading the language, see what the guidelines are, see what the waiver process is, and spend more money to make sure that happens. >> host: so if your waiver isn't approved, what happens? >> i have not thought about that much, peter. again, listen, i am an entrepreneur and a business owner, and we are constantly reinventing ourselves every day and my goal in life is to reproduce myself and i mean i want to reproduce myself in others. the people i mentor, i want them to surpass what i was able to accomplish on my business resume. and i find no matter what the outcome is with the entrepreneur i will find a way to continue to own a television station and much more. >> host: we have been talking with armstrong williams the owner of the flint michigan station and myrtle beach, south carolina station. >> on the next washington journal, tim ryan discusses the federal budget and followed by the senate chairman on energy and health care issues. and later los angeles times brian bennett will talk about the whitehouse deportation policy under president obama. washington journal live every morning with your calls, facebook comments and tweets on 7 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> i think what we need is something akin to the grace commission during the reagan commission or the brat commission during the clinton administrati administration. an outside group with integrity to come in and do an audit of government. every agencies has a purpose and if it is not fulfilling that purpose or doing it within a reasonable budget it should be cut or eliminated. let's take head start. this came in with the highest motivation. do you know and i didn't until i researched it, there are now three head starts. early head start, enhanced head start and regular. we have the other two dos the first one was working. >> cal thomas on fixing a broken washington on and immediately following a heritage book party for mr. thomas has he signs his book and chats with guest. and this weekend on booktv, this year's national bloack writers conference. and sunday at two, strengthening communities and a panel on publishing. >> the whitehouse announced two executive orders on equal pay. >> good afternoon, and welcome. i am the executive vice president for policy at american progress. we are excited you decided to join us on the discussion against combating pay discrimination. tomorrow is equal pay day and we need to take the time to recognize we have not done everything we need to do in terms of ensuring more "ecstatic nation: confidence, crisis, and compromise, 1848-187 equitand. equal pay isn't just a woman's issue. it is a family issue. families increasingly rely on women's wages to make ends meet. between 1967 and 2010, the percentage of mothers who brought home a quarter of the earning rose from less than a third at 28% to nearly 2/3rds. today we have betsey stevenson who serves as a council of economic advisers and is the leading market on policy. she has focused work on how different public policies affect the labor market and women's and families. we are partnering with the summit on working family issues. we are happy to have her. betsey's record is long. she has taught at leading university and written for journals. she is on leave from the university of michigan gerald r ford's school of public policy and economic's department where she is an associate professor of public policy and economics. we will be joined by a panel that is moderator by joscolyn fry. the panel will include jacqueline berrien, edward montgomery, and victory butson and equal advocate pay amanda mcmillan. right now, i would like you to welcome dr. stevenson to the stage. [ applause ] >> thank you. i want to thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's discussion. the issue of women's pay and participation in the workforce is vitally important for women and for our economy. it is moving and heart wrenching at a personal level. a fact you will not miss when you hear amanda's story today. it is also a matter of central importance for your nation in the 21st century. without making more of the women in the labor force, we cannot maintain our competitiveness. america has long flourished because of the productive works. we must do better. we can do better and succeeding with women is at the heart. women are half of the labor force. however, it stalled at 75% in the 1990's. women's participation over the period has continued to grow in other countries and a lack of family-friendly policies like paid parental leave, availability high quality day care and the right to work time is an ex -- explanation of why women's numbers have dropped. women are overtaken men as graduates in college and high school. and women are the majority of the our young, highly skilled workers. women are receiving training and entering higher paying fields that were once exclusive to men. and these facts highlight how important women are for our labor force and economy and for us to remain competitive. these facts also help explain why women's earnings have grown. 4-10 families have a women as the primary breadwinner and among employed married women their earnings comprise 44% of the household earnings. women are gaining skills, going into higher paid professions and relied on for families. so why are we stuck at 77 cents on the dollar? the gender wage gap is seen across occupations and we see it when men and women are doing identical work side by side. let's take the challenges that computer science is facing as the new york times reported. the share of women declined from 35% to 18% in 2012. a rare example of women loosing ground in a trend that is in the opposite direction of the needs of the labor force. perhaps more troubling is the fact that women drop out of computer science professions at rates double than men as they experience a culture that is too unwelcoming. making sure computer science can attract women and keep them is dire over the coming generations. the economic competitiveness relies on it. without women in tech, we cannot succeed in tech. women are choosing occupations because they offer flexibility without guilt and potential penalty. more eric -- occupations need to figure how they can work with woman and families. the gender wage gap grows throughout the careers. every year what men and women earn grows. ever slight instance of discrimination and every slight edge giver to a man adds up. the young girl who is teased for liking math, the woman who drops her class because the teacher is inappropriate, the woman who is passed over for a promotion because she took maternity leave and the woman that is tired of being an outsider and changes career. there is no end to the stories and each story ends up to 77 cents on the dollar. the president knows this is a national program and left unaddressed it will erode our position in the world. that is why he asked for opportunities to look for to help women succeed. between now and this summer, the president has asked his advisors to reach out and work with business leaders, researchers, advocates, state and local governments to explore works place flexibility, equal pay and lever among others. to make sure we are doing all that we can and all that we must to make the best use of american talent and to ensure u.s. competitive in the 221st centur. they know what to do. they can pass the paycheck fairness act, the act that supported the lilly ledbetter fair pay act. if you cannot find out how much others are earning you cannot find out if you are being discriminated against. lilly had to wait 18 years until an employer slipped her a note. the lilly ledbetter fair pay act extends the amount of time an employer can file a claim. the president is commit today doing this part and that is why the president is taking to new executive actions tomorrow to combat this challenge and stregthen equal pay law. he is going to sign an executive order prohibiting from contracted employers that discuss their wages. he is also going to sign a presidential memorandum to establish new regulations requiring federal contractors to submit summary data on compensati compensation providing race and gender. it will show what the pay gaps look like. and allow more targeted focus where there are discrepancy and reducing burdens on other employers. the president is leading by example and using the pen where he can and continue to urge congress to pass the paycheck fairness act to make sure all employers are held to the same acts. there is more work to do and more ways to find ways to move the ball further because one thing is year when women succeed, america succeeds. thank you. [ applause ] >> good afternoon and welcome it to the center for american progress. i c it is great to have all of you here. i am going to introduce your our parliame panel. we have a terrific panel. first, immediately to my right is the chair equal employment opportunity commission, jacqueline berrien, welcome. she has a resume that is far too lengthy to recount but what i will tell you is that she has a long history in public service as a lit gator at the naacp fund and has been worked on women's issues as well. and she was a appointed by the president as chair in july of 2009. seated next to her is amanda mcmillan from jackson, mississippi. i am sure you will be able to tell that when she starts talki talking. we have called her an equal pay advocate and she has a personal story to tell about her advocatiadvocat advocateing and challenge pay discrimination and winning. thank you for being here. and seating next to her is edward montgomery, as the dean georgetown university, he also has a long record. he was an assistant secretary in the department of labor during the clinton administration. and he did work for auto recover for president obama and he is an economist and will be able to bring a unique perspective. and victoria butson is last and she works on a range of issues affecting women both domestically and internationally and has been a leader on these issues and we are excited and pleased to have you join us. i will start with amanda because i am sure you didn't think in your life you would be out there as an advocate and i think it would be interesting for folks to hear a little bit about your experience and you were here in mississippi and tell us about what the problem was and what was it that prompted you to think something was going on in the work place. >> thank you so much for having me. i never thought i would be on any type of a stage talking about my experience but i am so grateful and thankful to be here. ten years i was a wholesale distributor and supplied goods to merchants. i was an office manager and i did whatever they needed me to do. processed invoices, took orders from customers and whatever they needed me to do. over the years, because they liked the way i worked, they liked me as an employee, they promoted me to be their accounts payability and receiver manager and that gave me insight into their banking records and insight into what other's were making in the company. if that had not happened, i would have never known what the others were making. it was a very hostile work environment just to be clear. it was hostile work environment. you were not going to discuss what you made with other people inside or outside of this company. because i had that inside information and i knew what others were making i wanted to make that money, too, and when positions and sales became available and people would retire or go to another job i inquired if i could fill out an application to be considered for that position. and time and time and time again when i asked to apply even they told me no and it is because i was a woman and people wouldn't want to do business with me and that it was too dangerous for a woman to do because i would have to go into the bad neighborhoods and as a woman i cannot do that. and they told me i would not be a good mother if i was out on the road making sales calls and what if my child fell off the monkey bars and i was three hours away and she needed me them. that is not a good mother. and that was the answer i was given time and time again. >> and just decribe what was the job you wanted to get? >> i wanted to be a salesman for this company. you went and called on customers and took their orders. it isn't brain surgery or anything. i was already doing it on the phone. but it was outside sales versus being inside the office. >> so the things you were doing already were very similar? >> very similar. >> and how often did you ask them about it? >> at least on four to five formal occasions where i was able to document what happened. i asked if i took a self-defense class would they be happy and could i apply them and they said no. there was a whole gamut of things i tried to do to appease the problems of being a woman for me to consider changing the jobs. and even asking if i got a sex change they said no. >> that seems extreme. [laughter] >> what did you do instead since you didn't want to go there? >> instead, i researched my rights. i did it on my own. i went to the computer which was a wealth of information for me. i started to read books about other people's experience and what i was experiencing and if this was legal or illegal, i was trying to define it for myself and figure out the answer. i researched it myself. >> and ultimately what did you decide after you did the research? >> i decided what they were doing was wrong morally, ethically and more importantly legally and i filled a complaint. >> what happened with the complaint? >> it was taken. there was an investigation done. it took a long time. four years. it was hard to be patient and hard to understand the cogs of justice take a long time and you have to go through all of these different steps to make this happen but i knew the truth. and i knew that that could prove it and i didn't care how long it took. i didn't care. >> well thank you for that. and your seated next to the chair of the eeoc, jacqueline berrien, and i am sure this isn't the first time you heard this story or many others like it. people consistently, women in particularly, say that pay discrimination is a challenge, can you talk about what the eoc's, and not specific cases, but what is your observation in terms of pay discrimination and experiences like amanda's. >> first of all, thank you for inviting me to join you today. the story amanda mcmillan shared is in some ways typical of what we see and atypical of what women experience. let me start with what is common or what we see in other circumstances and been able to use the law to address the problem of pay discrimination. first of all, one aspect of what amanda mcmillan experienced was to be paid less than men in the work place who were doing similar work. as she said she was doing sales, the difference was some people were outside but she was inside doing the sales. the work is similar, the work is identical in some respects and yet she was earning less for doing the same jobs or part of the same jobs. but the other thing that is similar is that one of the reasons there is a gap in pay between men and women on average is that women are still excluded from better compensated and regulated and segregrated even. for example in food businesses it isn't uncommon to see the women in the part where tips are part of the income so they are not making minimal wage and not eligible for the higher tips that go to different wait staff. in your case you found it was fine as long as you stayed in the office, but when you started to inquire about jobs that would pay you more, that is when you got the pushback about it would not be appropriate, it would be too dangerous, even though you were willing and able to do it. we have represented in a number of cases or been able to resolve charn charge of discrimination in the administration process under certain circumstances where women are shutout of jobs they wanted to take and qualified. sometimes in male-dominated areas like mining, construction, transportation like long hall trucking, rigging and other jobs where the representation of women is small. so we are challenging that and challenging when men and woman are working in the same workplace and doing the same job but not being paid the same thing. in another case, a woman was working for a fast food restaurant and came in as a cashier, a sandwich maker, worked her way up and was eventually a shift manager, but at every stage along the process, she found men were working beside her but earning more and sometimes it was simply they were paid more and other times it was that the restaurant would sis make decisions that when business was show, woman were sent home and men were able to stay. and we were able to find happening all across the country. the thing about amanda mcmillan case that is somewhat unique is that it is more often the case that people have no idea they are being paid less. and the lack of transparency around pay and compensation and what people earn is one of the real impediments as a government agency and lawyers in private practice to do as much as we would hope to address the issue of pay discrimination. >> and that is part of the president's executive action that would deal with transparency and i was going to ask you about the invisibility of pay discrimination. is that the biggest challenge to uncover the pay discrimination? are there problems with the law itself? >> the transparency issue is a major problem. it is one form of discrimination that is a person can be victimized by and not know it is happening. you happen to have access to financial records. many of you may know the story with lilly ledbetter fair pay act. she was working for good year and had no idea she was being paid less and an anonymous tipster told her through a note. a woman who was working as a human resource manager learned that two men, who held the same position, and less load, were earning more. and partly because of her role as a human resource agent she was able to piece the records together through access in her employment. but most people are not in that position. and the particular challenge is when a workplace prohibits people from talking about pay by subjecticing them to discipline if they discuss their pay and that makes it impossible to know if they are being paid the same as others in the workplace. >> i want to move to edward montgomery because you have worn different hats. you have been in an administration with enforcement responsibility and you have the perspective as an economist as well. the issue of fair pay. tell us why fair pay matters. why does it matter from an economic perspective? >> i think you can start with the economic perspective starting with the story she told. individuals who go into the market place and not get the earning they deserve it has a significant impact on the quality of life they can enjoy and their families enjoy. not just today but over their whole life time because what you earn today affect yours pension and retirement so it sticks with you and your family and changes the opportunities your family can enjoy. we as a society, as you add that up over millions of women, you come to a very big number in terms of the economic impact. that means we as an economy are not growing as rapidly as we should be and are not am enjoying the quality of life. doing something about the gender pay gap is part of this solution for how do we get american families the income they deserve. these things accumulate. they affect the communities availability to grow and businesses by not growing. not hiring someone who has the talent she has is hurting themselves. so it is individual stories to macro pictures for the economy. >> i think betsey stevenson talks about this and the role of women in families and you know increasingly being breadwinners and the importance of addressing tale talent. you know how does that play out? historically, they said it is nice if women earn money but the men are bringing home the resources. is that true? >> that hasn't been true for 35 years. most of the family income growth since the 1970s has been because of women's and their increased earnings. if there was a day of the icing on the cake, it is the cake now. you cannot escape the reality that more women are essential to the earning of the household. this is a central every day issue for the wellbeing of the vast majority of the households. 40% rely on them as the soul and 20% as the partial. so women's earnings account for a significant contribution in over 80% of households in the united states and that is a big issue. ... >> how do we know there is pay discrimination without paid 80? and so it seems as secretary herman was very strong about wanting us to go for collecting basic pay information so that you have some way of figuring out which employers have issues and which employers to not have issues. so the copay survey came into place during that time. we presented during the bush administration, but it was the first time we actually started to be able to get regular kinds of payday that. without that transparency as the commissioner just talked about how the you know where the problems are? who do you know? and quite frankly is not just how much. it gives people, individuals the power to address the problems themselves because what allowed the players to get away with it is the absence of. it empowers women to negotiate. empowers women to demand. it empowers these forces to come in. as all of those benefits if you make the data available. >> you alluded to the fact that betsey stevenson talked-about, the other executive action of the president is around a collection of payday. you know, is there a way to collect it and still protect, you know, confidentiality to make sure that, you know, to give comfort to employers of all of their formation. >> many of these same employers collect a lot of our data off of the web and have no problem saying that it is going to be completely confidential. there are lots of tools and techniques to minimize data and make sure that it does not come out with identifiers. that is really a small-time technological problem to be able to do that. >> that is really very helpful. i want to move to you because you have been part of an initiative in boston that has addressed the wage gap in a completely different way. what i liked about it is that it was a demonstration that everybody can do something. everybody has a role to play. amanda played her role. the chair played the official role. you know, we have the academic perspective. but you have been involved in a voluntary effort. any talk about that? >> sure. as we heard today there are issues with the individual faces to the issues which we face as a society, issues where the government can step in. but in addition there are issues for the employer. we have done in boston, and it is called the 100 percent talent , if one starts with the premise which i think is a fine promised to begin that good, well-many people still have a hard time closing the pay gap. many employers are aware that they have a pay gap and may even wish to solve it but don't really know what to do about it. creating systems and structures that are going to systematically produce an effective closing of the gap can be challenging. may not be that they don't want to do it. is that they don't know how to do it in a way that can permeate the company. so when the mayor of boston decided that he wanted to engage in making boston the best place for working women in the united states, boston had some significant attributes in that era. as betsey stevenson talked about and has been reiterated by michael panelists, women at the high-school, college, postgraduate level i receive in the majority of degrees, the majority. now, betsey stevenson talked about how in terms of young, highly-trained talent women now the majority in the u.s. by the way, this is also true in europe and is going to be true in south america and the next two years. so what we already knew is that large companies, big to multinationals are totally aware of this. they already get on board and figure out how to close gaps because the talent market is predominantly female. and governments understand. what is the incentive for the company? how do we begin solving the problem, not just where a man message which is a totally valid, important, and reasonable place, but amanda already wants to be paid fairly. how do you have equal investment wanted to pay women fairly and will something out, not regulation, but a place where companies can engage, feel good about it, and it can get through all the legal hurdles because when you say you want to close the wage gap, you're kind of saying that you have waged a which can put them at some risk. so the mayor very wisely put together a task force which included those who understood the data, those who had worked significantly in government like my colleagues, individuals like allison clark who serve in the management committee for state street bank and in many businesses that are we like to call main street businesses. so all different levels of business. how can we come together to create an opportunity, we like to call a nudge, how can we manage people in the right direction? first, we have to make it easy. we wrote will -- we like to the make a gorgeous white paper that listed 33 different interventions that companies could take to help close the wage gap, everything from providing greater workplace flexibility to hire talented individuals, frankly male or female. all of these interventions that help women help everybody. everybody wants to work place where they can effectively contribute, not be penalized for who they are, and give their best work. an employer who wants to leverage the investments that have already been made. when amanda told her story when i kept thinking about is command is a worker who wants more responsibility, who has been with the company for chin years, who has repeatedly asked for growth. that is an employee that companies want because that is someone, they will get a leveraged back. it will be making greater profit because they have an employee who has knowledge of the company, investment in the company, shows commitment, as loyalty, and has some tenacity of wanting to improve. that is the employee did you do not want to lose than ever on the sidelines or working from a competitor. when companies look at it from the talents -- talent management when they get it. will we try to do is make it easy. so we made sure that they could choose any three actions that they wanted to take, a complex and that they're going to do this action which means they can publicize that. they can get some credit for trying to do the right thing. and then we have given them what i think is going to be the most valuable piece which is a community where they can have a discourse to talk about what is working well and talk about where the challenges are. the larger the company the more they tend to know where the challenges are. we are giving them an opportunity to participate in the fixing in a way that there will be penalized for and there's nothing punitive. and we will also ask the give us their scrub data. so your question of how easy it is to make anonymous, well, at academic institutions like georgetown are harvard we're pretty good at taking data, making anonymous, and figuring a what it tells us. and we are hoping that the example in boston won't just be me because it can be replicated but will be meaningful because it will tell us things we did not know. the companies, they want to know. they want to retain the female talent. they understand that management and female talent is the future. for the u.s. in particular to be incredibly competitive into the future we have to solve this because the majority of our talent is in no. >> is there an overall bull work time friendly trying to do this and? >> what i would say is the mayor was open because of this right away. and it now the mayor of boston coming gates as well. those of us to study these types of issues and work in this field, even a man the talked about how this is slow going. we are hoping that we will be able to see in a way that we can look at really clean data, disaggregating for all kinds of other factors to see, you know, how long it takes. i think that the goal needs to be when we talk about where things gestalt that it's moving in the correct direction. $0.77 on the dollar is unbelievably poor considering that women are the majority of the educated talent. no one mentioned today, which i'm sure everyone on the panel doesn't maybe you know, the more highly educated a woman is the larger the pay gap. and what is so insidious about that fact is, this is an issue which an individual cannot inoculate oneself from through education. this is an issue which can unbelievably fundamentally not be solved on an individual level which is why this type of partnership between government, academia, individual action, and public-private partnership is the only way that we can really tackle. >> the response to the initiative? >> creek question. the response has been unbelievably positive. allison clark, my colleague from state street worked very effectively that every single thing that we put together, we took it through the whole legal team. there was nothing in this report we did not do this in a silent way. if it had just come out of academia or just the amount of government we would not have gotten it right. the way we talk about how diversity brings more effective decision making, particularly for complex problems, this is a complex problem. in order to get it right you need lots of different actors around the table who can figure out. so by the time it was brought to the public, meaning different companies to decide on, it had already been done right in that it did not put companies a risk. you know, my belief, you have to meet people when they are. it's respectful, is the right way to do it, and it makes things move more quickly. so we went and sat with what used to be known as the ball now called the massachusetts competitive partnership. we sat down with the presence of the largest corporation in massachusetts and the greater boston area. all of them nodded and understood that these are types of issues that they were facing. everyone wants to do something about it, and here we are giving them a ready-made place to help solve the problem where they can talk about it in what i would call a safe car reasonable, effective way. we get many of them to sign on which gave a lot of confidence to businesses which were small and medium-size enterprises. and then, you know, a lot of the mom-and-pop stores, you know, really wanted to do something about it. we are working now and coming up. we have some type of brand kind of like the good housekeeping seal where you no product has been tested and people can displayed in the shop windows were say, hey, we are trying to do the right thing. we have signed on to the boston compact. so we have had no detractors. i am sure it will have some people who don't want to sign on we thought it would take us quite a while to get to our first 50 major employers. we are looking forward to seeing how it plays out, and i am probably most excited the. >> madam chair, i wonder if we could speak to come into these types of voluntary efforts helpful in terms of your work? >> i have to say was very excited, and it is a gorgeous white paper, by the way. >> thank you. >> when i saw it, particularly by the fact that a lot of these spaces in the discussion about the pay gap have been around is there a gap or isn't it? does it happen because of choices where they make or is it really proof of discrimination? overwhelmingly black and all the research. there is some part of a gap that cannot be explained by non discriminatory factors. there is also a difference in the pay gap in the private and public sector. in the public sector where there is greater transparency about pay and salaries, very often that a skills are not very discretionary and where they are publicized, the pay gap is a fraction of what it is in the private sector. so we do know this is not a figment. there is reason to believe from all the research that there is an issue. to your point about the more highly educated women and where they stand in this, there have been two studies in recent years about women with medical degrees. one out of new york, the other, i forget what part of the country was in, but it was conducted and published a journal of the american medical association publication. both found that after you control a specialty because for many years the medical profession explained this gap by saying, the problem is, women choose these parts of medicine are the specialties that are less well compensated. they're want to be pediatricians and family practitioners, and they're not orthopedic or neurologist. so these researchers have essentially gone about taking that out of the equation, saying, we're going to compare apples to apples, looking at medical residents with the san specialties, with the same backgrounds, with comparable grades and comparable experiences and skills -- still the gap is there and still the gap is, in the case of the new york resident study, more than $16,000. to your point, obviously, if you think about the beginning of someone's medical career, it will only grow from there. that compensation will become a baseline for the next job, or that compensation may determine what kind of research dollars terrible to access. so there is no question that there are things that require some change and intervention. i was excited to see the approach that you have taken in boston. frankly, that is very solution oriented. i think that we can spend a lot of time talking brought the problem of the gender pay gap. my worry is that if that is where we stop command of the discussion begins and ends every equal pay with that we will be with a past president of catalyst said we are today, which is at the rate we're going the pay gap will not be completely closed until 2057. i know. i think that is too long. i think everyone on the panel thinks that's too long. certainly the kind of approach the your taking and really taking a fresh look and trying to figure out interventions that may make a difference. >> one additional piece of the changes that we have been looking at. we have something called the gender action portal. we are taking all of the state alleges experiments abased, particularly randomized controlled trial data and summarizing in for a lay audience. they're is a link to the actual paper. for those who want to read it, you can. you can put in wage gaps, and in papers will come upon different interventions. we will leave out how as opposed to what. what is the gap, which is important, but how you close it. and understanding one size will fit all. there have culture, capacity for change, they have the questions on the inside, you know, predominantly i fundamentally believe that there is no evidence to the contrary, most of the time people think they're doing the right thing, whether or not they are. there is all this change that has to come from getting that mindset right. howdy change that mind-set without having to tell anyone that you are back? telling people that there are bad or wrong slows down the process of change. it is required sometimes, but if you can get to change without that we can speed up. >> to you have -- do they share best practices and all? >> we are creating a venue where they well. people will choose. again, they get to choose how much they will share, what there will talk about all with him there will talk about it. it creates a space where everyone is working on solving this with an investment that is better for the whole economic model. what began as the city and is now growing. the government is to point to the task force, which i am also a part of as well. all of the actors they you would expect our working together to figure out how we do this more broadly. i just presented it in paris, the mayor of san francisco, we have all kinds of people more interested. no one wants the city to underpay women. how does that help? people want to grow their economy, and this is one of the ways to do it. women's challenges, it's a great untapped resource. >> i assume, madam chair, that it is helpful to have an initiative like this, of voluntary initiative where people are sharing information and looking at their practices. do you also provide technical assistance? is that part of the role that you apply? >> absolutely. a big part of what we do and one of the pillars to our strategic approach to enforcing the law is prevention through outreach and education and technical assistance. and that think there are definitely some things that we can learn. i also want to share that one other aspect of our work on equal pay issues today really thanks to the launched by president obama of the national equal pay enforcement task force in 2009, together with the department of labor, the office of personnel management, the department of justice, will we doing on the government side, some of the same information sharing, trying to learn from each other, sharing best practices. we did something which seems like a simple intervention, but it had not been done. each of these enforcement agencies has researchers, we have investigators, lawyers, and one of the things we did was collaborate on developing training to deal with equal pay issues. why should one agency look at this issue and approach it one way and another agency look at an approach it another way. that is how things fall between the gap. so the result, we train in 2011 more than 2,000 federal employees. not just from the eeoc, but from across all of those agencies as well as some state and local fair employment practices agencies. it is just one example of how we, too, are trying to make sure that we are working smarter, collaborating, sharing information. there is no reason for any of us to reinvent the wheel. we are taking a similar approach and had been sharing information about data collection issues and challenges and out to improve our strategic enforcement of the loss. >> well, i want to go back to you, amanda. he said you heard from the chair , all these different people about different ideas around the workplace. if you look back on your experience, would it have been helpful to have had, you know, some effort going on where people were voluntarily sort of looking at their pay practices? what was your experience? the people talk about this issue, or were you just a unique person raising it? >> no. no one was raising it. and as i listen to everybody kind of talk, i think that my story not only was i not -- to fold. not only was i not given the opportunity to even apply for a job when i did inquire about equal pay because there were gentleman that worked in the office of me that did virtually the same job, but we did not make the same amount. i was making probably about $15,000 less than they were your and when i inquired of being paid equally to them, the answer from my boss was, but, amanda, they have families to take care of. they need to be paid more. and my response to that was, what do you call the little people that i have a home? they are my family, and i am in charge of taking care of them. yes, it would have been so helpful. women don't want to to get over. we don't hate men. we don't want to rule the world. i love men. i think they're awesome, but that does not mean that i don't have -- i am not afforded the same opportunities. i have a 7-year-old little girl. she doesn't understand any of this beaches try to figure out why mommy's going the d.c. wire you doing this? and i explained to her. she is in second grade. a's, b's, sees comedies, and thus are important. she's beginning of the chevy crazy take a test. i said, if the light, a little boy in a class ticket test and the get all the answers writing gun running and you took the same testing of all the answers right but gutsy, how would that make you feel? she said, well, bad. that's not good. shouldn't he like it in may because he is a little boy and you get a seat because your lawn grow? and she said, well, no. that's not fair. that's not nice. dustup the way it should be. you know, when you look at the way i just want to be paid equally. i don't want to feel like i have to be an espionage despite a figure out what everybody else is making. like you said, wanted more responsibility. one of the take care of my family. i believe that when women in america do better, our country is better. >> what would you say to somebody who came to you and, you know, says they have a similar problem or they weren't sure. it's out there were experiencing discrimination. >> i would tell them to do a lot of the similar things that i did , do the research, figure out what these things mean. what does this law mean? what does this title mean to you and if you don't know, ask somebody. they can't give you the answer, ask somebody else until you get the answer. what does it feel like in your gut? i knew. and sometimes it was the only thing the cabin going. i knew the truth. i knew that what was going on with me was wrong, and i knew the truth. i got to the park or did not care what anybody else thought because i knew was true. and i could not look at my little girls and tell them that you can do anything in this world you want. you can do, be anything. i was in such a state. i could not be anything of wanted to be. this company was not allowing in affording me the opportunity to read out and i tell my daughters that in america you can do that? through their research, talk to people, reach out to people that know the technical things. the eeoc was immensely helpful to me give you any time that i did know the answer to something i could call my lady and say, now, what does this mean? what's going on? are want to help. should i read this book? what does this mean to mcbride why go from here? you know, trust your gut. trustor get. >> it is an amazing story. i have to say, you know, it is an amazing effort that you did for yourself and your family. you know, one of the things that betsy stevenson talked about among the broader economic implication, 21st century workplace, wonder if you can, you know, talk a little bit about that. we will hear a lot about what the president is proposing a round pace secrecy, collection of payday it. it all sounds very technical. people don't always talk about that. as we look forward to a 21st century work place, what is it that we should be aspiring to? what is a 20% through workplace going to look like? >> nice to dream. tried think the 21st century workplaces got to be one in which each individual can realize their potential. you don't have to leave who you warren what you are at the workplace to work, whether that means your mother, father, whether that means you have kids and don't want the things that are a part of you, you can actually bring into the workplace. when i think of a work flexibility movements, what is that all about? is about allowing you take the same things the prize in value in your day-to-day life and bring them to the work place and maintain them. right now we have too much of a system that says lee that the door. those are all impediments rather than viewing them as strategies to make those ways to exchange with our product. and so we are in a global competition. most of that global competition will come about as a result of which company -- which countries get the most of the people. half of the work force is women. half of the educated work force, more than half of the college educated work forces women. how can we compete with the countries around the globe which would give all of us a place to grow unless we find ways to allow them to be women and to be successful in the workplace. that's what i think. >> into you think -- a lot of the employers you're dealing with share that view. >> absolutely. and that think the way they also look at it -- i mean, we are already invested. i will give you a vignette. put it in a stark relief. pakistan, for example, when they open the gate weighs so that men and women can apply to medical school in equal numbers without there being a quota of how many could be accepted, instantly more women were accepted. the majority of people graduating more physicians. culturally it is still -- there are many impediments to women, all types of pediments so that more than one-third, and some have been as high as half never practiced or did not practice more than five years. when you think of what it means for society to invest when half of the people that you educate to do something then don't want to do, what happens when we invest as a society, invest as a company, invest as an organization, invest as a family , and then they cannot fully participate in society, that is going to have an extraordinary economic cost. companies absolutely want to get the return on investment they have made. women certainly want to get the return on investment they made themselves. sacrificing the sources, this is one of these nominal opportunities where it actually lines of positively in there is no loser it works in the public's fear the academics here . also works organizationally individually. an individual could read the white paper, and the individual or just some summaries on the website. they can move forward and suggested to the manager or just pulled strategies out of it and use it. seeing a person, we often approach the president at the company level. one not begin there. the more senior the people are, usually the more they get it. in the business of the company's problem. this is a nice lady get in and begin to solve the. >> camp. madame chair, if people think that they are being paid less what he told people to do? >> first of all, to the points that amanda was making, i hope that it would be about easier for you to find the information today give you one of the things that we did as a part of the equal pay enforcement task force was together with our partners in the task force to a much more aggressive and extensive public education outreach program around pay issues. still more to do, build more partnerships to make it even more effective and make it penetrate even more places. certainly a part of this was to raise awareness to read it obviously -- i think your comments underscore that that was an important part of where the task force decided to do. secondly, i think one of the things that is important in your story and that we find in many of the charges that we get in this area and in other areas is, what evidence -- one of the first questions you will be asked is what evidence you have that tests to support your believe? even if you don't have your pay stub and someone else's that will be the smoking gun, do you have your pier records? de have records of instances or can you recall put together information about the instances when increasingly pay is not just a matter of every other week. it is other kinds of income. so some things that we would want to know, our people paid? if you have a chance to get all of the different types of compensation that were given in your place, as far as you can tell where men and women getting bonuses when bonuses were given out or did they just go to a certain types of employees and not others? we will be interested in that kind of information. we will also help to address that there will be paid differences. we have also heard from some advocates and others in the field at some time when another type of discrimination has happened, whether it is harassment or some other type of discrimination, and the course of that investigation we will learn and in addition there might have been concerns about pay. so whatever brings the person in the door, and were talking today about pay discrimination. but in fact pilaus that we in for some reenforce of the. so anytime that a person either suspects have reason to believe or learn something that makes them believe that there might be discrimination on the basis of pay, those are the kinds of things that will be helpful for you to have bought about, things you can come forward with the will make a difference. finally there is more and more information available as advocates and others are beginning to take advantage of all the information that is out there. you can start to do things like see how your pay lines up to the market. what are people who hold your job, whenever it is, paid in general. they're resources on the web and otherwise that help to identify and figure out whether they're making with the market pays for specific jobs which is important from those who are negotiating, especially people coming out of school, people negotiating your first time job or who are negotiating a change professions >> and you know, the other thing i wanted to ask you because a lot of times we hear we live in a litigious society. the suggestion is, you know, people just like to go to court. but i know, you know, you were a litigator. how hard is it to actually bring these cases, when these cases for people in the cases. >> well, one of the things under the equal pay act is that you have to show that the jobs of equal very often a lot of time spent if you go the court just trying to prove, yes, this job is the same as that. average basis you can imagine that could be used to challenge the premise will, in the defense of the case. in fact, you know, there are far easier ways to get money and to bring a lawsuit under any discrimination statute. and as somebody who did represent people were victims, often said this, talk with companies, and sure one thing that we can agree on. it's always better to prevent discrimination from happening in the first place. again, i think that is another reason why the approach you're taking in boston is an exciting one and a promising one. we certainly know that when we can achieve voluntary compliance, when we can prevent discrimination from occurring in the first place, that is definitely a when-when. it is not easy to prove these cases. >> i was going to say, it does seem to me that the employers probably feel good that this is an affirmative thing that they can do. >> absolutely. >> is positive for their workplace. >> it takes all the same issues but put some of from where they can stand up and feel proud of it and it's helpful internally with their internal work force. it's helpful because it gives managers or strolling with these issues a press to talk about it, tools to address it, as curve for individual women. and for that reason when you talk about where we need to be, you know, to have a stronger economy in the what we want is businesses who are informed about how they treat people fairly, make sure there paying people fairly, that there being talked about these processes. >> i mean, i think, as both said, having the employers voluntarily act to prevent the problem from coming up to begin with, to be proactive, thinking about their system, think about their practices, to regularly be going in and looking at themselves is the best case scenario for all sides. it saves four years of arctic. it saves thousands of dollars in litigation costs. it helps women and the company's reach their potential now. the more that one can do in the space the better off you can do, i think we'll always need eeoc to take care of hopefully will will become a smaller and smaller number of bad actors. her story is a horror story. >> i no there are folks who have questions, but amanda, want to give you the last word for the moment. when you think back on it, you know, you listen to all the different pieces year. you think back on your experience. it did take four years, but are you happy you did it? >> yes. i'm very happy that i did it. i did not do it for the money. i did when a settlement. we went to mediation. we did not actually go to court. i did not do it for the money. it wasn't that much money. it was because it was wrong. i talk about my children. my mother grew up telling me, you could be anything you want to be. i wanted to honor that commitment to my children to say this in turn. yes, i have no regrets for what i did whatsoever. i did not always to the right thing. it was not always the most direct way to go maybe. i learned a lot. i certainly never thought i was going to be in front of all you people, but i'm so pleased to be yes. it is the right thing. it is the right and. i have no regrets whatsoever. >> thank you. thank you for are really interesting conversation. [applause] >> and i do think we have time for couple questions. [inaudible question] we have a monopoly on that. another thing that's going to change. to what extent is women's disproportionate caregiving role the moving factor in that independent? and can we ever hope for pay equity without paid family leave and paid sick is? thank you. >> you raised a couple of really good points. what are you start, victoria. >> that is an exceptionally good point. it has become kind of passe to want to talk about the second shift toward a double burden. one of the things i often discusses all of the work on gender equity has done a fantastic job of letting women have virtually 100 percent of the job with their mothers did and virtually 100 percent of the town fathers did. that's okay if that's really jurors. but for most women it isn't really a choice. what happened and it is will record. i think it -- i think it's an extraordinarily large part of the overall problem, but not a huge part of the pay gap for. it's part of the pay gap, but with more of the pay gap uneven with companies have on the books policies that parents can take or when it can take from maternity leave, it's not that women are gone two weeks, 12 weeks. it's the myth and the penalty that comes from a that in most professions when women take that leave their penalized for that and we also know if women take significant time of my 24 months, they are usually under employed the rest of their lives degrees of the pay gap becomes an extraordinarily large and embedded get out, not because they have to care for the children, but because of how others perceive that. and i give you one more fact about that. we have some wonderful research under the age p.s. the shows that when women and men in the same job in the san corporation each have a child commend giveaway is called a relational bonus. bob becomes a more likable guy. he's a bit nicer. and the breadwinner myth which said so eloquently talked about how it is just not real and has been from 125 years that then people say, you know, bob isn't going anywhere. we can count on bob. bonn is seen as more committed and nicer. when betsy has a child bitsy is viewed as less present, less committed, was engaged, even when her behaviors have changed in no way. and what that means is really high penalties. and the individual has no idea what just happened. but he comes back to work, working harder. each time she gets back store should doubles down. at her desk more, but she doesn't realize that it's all this perception. if you know if you can, it. there are narratives and tools to do that. >> it does seem to me your question raises the issue of a legal impediment and also the need to change the culture of the workplace. i think and spoke to that a great deals will be the year of a point about paid family leave and paid sick days above policies that the center for american progress firmly supports to really make sure that we have strong workplace policies. does anybody else want to comment? >> just that the eeoc did several years ago put together some information and had a public meeting on caregiver discrimination. as you set in, and really is combination of things. partly it centers on pregnancy personally or needs associated with pregnancy or a combination were changed is related to pregnancy, but it is more than that. one of the things that we recognize is that by looking at caregiver discrimination we're also looking at the fact that women also have a disproportionate amount of responsibility for all the care. it is an even just a matter of and the job better years that me have this impact. it can, for women, be over much of their work lives of some of those challenges about receiving a balance or trying to manage work and family responsibilities or hopefully obtain some flexibility that happens without penalizing the where it can make a difference. there are definitely different dimension to that issue. sometimes it is a form of discrimination that we can address. >> other questions. >> i'm with an organization called a news that is trying certified building is being energy-efficient, had certification with certifiable to national or large corporation as having achieved a global standard for gender equality. it is sort of like that good housekeeping seal the victoria was talking about. it addresses the multi dimensional cultural problem. there are so hard to get to because the woman is in seeing it. the company is in seeing it. we do a very extensive analysis that is cooked up by lots of ph.d. some people at harvard and multinational corporations. it was actually incubated and launched the the world economic forum. is not come into the marketplace will we your finding is, victoria is so right that companies see this as an imperative. five years ago we were having to explain to them when needed to become gender equal. now there and cold sweat as to how. this is a metric based arroba with a customized plan for how they do a that has arrived on through this very sophisticated assessment project. that's another tool that is out there. we're seeing a lot because there seems to be a market driven demand. companies realize, you will make more money if you appreciate these women and don't lose the expense of the trend when. >> thank you. and glad he mentioned it. it is terrific to see a lot of these voluntary efforts growing as well. a question here. >> hi, pamela miller. the turning back to the university, i was there 30 years ago. journalism major. our protocol. i'm sitting there now with 18, 19, 22 euro women looking at them. thirty years ago we did not get the equal rights amendment. if you told me 30 years ago that in 30 years we still would have it, we still won't have the legislation on the books. when i was young 30 years ago would have looked to you and said, hunt, it will take that will. i say to them, this is the time. dr. martin luther king had a word that is for some reason following account of our vocabulary that he used to warn about, gradualism. he used to say -- one about that. don't allow gradualism with your rights. and i think that we have known some cynical falls. our rates were what we needed. we have to -- and i think now, we've known for a long time that we need the law. without the law we don't have the protection. it's wonderful. companies are coming up now. there are a lot of corporations that will do it voluntarily. we will have protection until we have the law on the books. i guess my question is whether you agree with that and not. is something that i found over my life span that whenever have rights until a small. >> i can start. if all the people want to weigh in. i think, you know, when you talk about these issues there are times when it feels like progress is slow. but press is important. no, progress does get made. it does stand toward justice. in know, my general take, and maybe others can weigh in, you need a little bit above. you're right. voluntary action alone is nice. and maybe some companies that do it. you know, sometimes the legal requirement gives a little push. it's the carrot and stick. i think one of the things that i liked about our conversation was held but complement each other. certainly it would be great if the eeoc was out of business. so, you know, i know that it will be nice if those cases did exist. looking forward woman not celebrated the day. >> one of the things about the history of the eeoc is we are gone back to 1964, the 50th anniversary, we opened our doors in july of 1965. one thing we have learned about -- over the course of the history of the agency is initially the only way to enforce the law was through persuasion. and over time it became clear to congress, it became clear to those who were concerned about it that we needed a range of ways to enforce the law, including access the litigation, including mediation which has allowed us to resolve cases more quickly and to reach a mutually agreeable lions the problems of discrimination. often very important to people or still on the job. and in a range of things in between. so there is no question, i think, while voluntary compliance is important, persuasion and moral persuasion as i believe they said when the reverse looking at what the agency should to be a part of it is also necessary over the past 50 years to at times go into court or to seek relief in other ways. we have done it, we have been able to achieve some significant change. as my special assistant who is here has shared a "with me from nelson mandela, when one climbs a great help one often finds there's another decline. that is, think of the nature of enforcement of civil rights in many cases. >> time for one more. >> one morbid. >> hi. the center for community change. wondering if any of you have exchange about the extent to which having a union in the workplace tests to alleviate the problem or not and if there's information available about that >> a few years ago the eeoc had a public forum to discuss pay equity issues. we had someone participating. one of the most important issues has addressed low wage women. one thing that we really can't leave without knowing specifically is that it's difficult if some of the issues that we have raised by court family balance and other kinds of confirms our even more challenging for low-wage working women. very often working multiple jobs. often because the working multiple jobs that may be in a part-time status, then they have few if any benefits, then me -- baena asking how long the be able to take leave, then in and have even basic sick leave. it may not have opportunities to be paid and all it to have to take care of a sick child or relative. so whenever we have said about women and the status of working women and the pay gap in general you can multiplying for working women and low-wage working women. certainly the report of was collaborative not help to illustrate in many ways how grave the situation is. one of the things that has made a difference in some occupations or job categories has been the availability of collective bargaining which addresses some of those needs. >> at the ground of time unfortunately. we can spend all afternoon here. i want to thank all of you. you're a terrific panel. in the school cannot montgomery, georgetown, madam chair from a poor employment opportunity commission and our fabulous equal pay advocates. thank you will. [applause] >> the u.s. house last week moved forward with the budget plan that passed the budget control and to vote republican into a budget committee. this and agree to extend long-term unemployment benefits to they. we'll show you part of that debate later. secretary of state john kerry will leave capitol hill tomorrow . a is expected to take questions on syria, iran, and the ukraine. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. our live coverage from the senate foreign relations committee starts at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span three. later in the day, a senate panel will hear from the u.s. coast guard commandant nominee and two nominees for the consumer product safety commission. live coverage from the senate commerce committee at 2:30 p.m. eastern also on c-span three. [inaudible conversations] >> the republican-controlled house budget committee agreed to a budget plan along party lines last week. house democrats and their response to the gop budget that relies on one and half trillion dollars in higher taxes of the next two years. part of last week's budget markup. >> this meeting will now come to order. welcome back, everybody. we will proceed with the consideration of the fiscal year 2015 concurrent resolution on the budget. before we begin, would like to welcome two new members to our committee, representative don from texas who is no stranger to the budget committee and representative killdee of michigan who i believe is new for the first time in the committee. we're happy to have you as new members. you were appointed last night. i would like to yield for any comments. >> thank you, mr. chairman. want to join you and welcome into terrific members. we have a veteran member of the budget committee and a new member. they're here in the nick of time so we have our reinforcements with us. >> it's going to be a long day. >> a good debate. >> we can do whatever you'd like >> first, want to begin by thanking the ranking member for working with me to develop a structure for this market that follows closely what we have done in the past. we have traditionally had a good, bipartisan agreement on how to conduct the committee's business. this year is no different. we have a very long day ahead of us, and i want to thank everyone for their cooperation. we will complete our work by midnight, and i hope that we can complete action sometime before that. part of the structure we have developed, we will begin by having presentations on the budget. in our control by the majority in in our control by the minority. make an opening statement, and the ranking member will make an opening statement. any other members who wish to make additional statements may submit them for the record. after those to opening statements the majority will use the remaining time left in its our command in the minority will use the remaining time left in its hour. after the presentations have concluded we will have staff walked through in which members can ask any questions that will take as long as the minority stakes. hopefully it will be within one hour. the move will ask any questions that they have. after the staff walk through we will then proceed to the amendment to the structure that we've worked out with the ranking member. i will describe the process more in detail. and now recognize the gentleman from georgia. >> you may want to recognize the gentleman from maryland. i ask unanimous consent that house rose 16, the chairman be authorized to declare a recess at any time today. >> without objection, so ordered it will now move to opening statements. >> first of all, want to thank the members of this committee. the second year in this session. this should not be of strange process to anyone with the exception of our two new members. this is our fourth budget in four years to read each one of our budgets has been on time and has been in balance. and though we have not always agreed on every detail we have worked through the tough issues on behalf of our constituents. i also want to thank the ranking member. i expect we will have a lot to talk about today. we won't always see eye to eye. he and his staff have done their part to uphold the committee's long tradition of bipartisan cooperation. our debates have always been spirited and civil. want to thank them for that as well. no, we passed a bipartisan budget at just a few months ago. some people might be wondering why your even during a budget if one is now in place. here is how i see it. that agreement was a step in the right direction but a bare minimum. before then the senate had not passed a budget nearly four years. talks broke down. senator murray and i try to change that. we found some common ground. a modest 2-year agreement to fill our most basic responsibilities. we spread our military from arbitrary across-the-board cuts. we returned to power of the purse back to congress, and we reduced the deficit without raising taxes. so the agreement was a step in the right direction, but from our perspective it did not go far enough. it did not do enough to address the driver of our debt. and it did not do enough to get our economy growing again. nearly five years after the recession many families still have not recovered. the past five years economic growth has been consistently failing to meet in dictations. in fact, the congressional budget office has consistently lowered its economic forecast. the budget in the economy are closely linked. just as a weak economy contracted budget and to read, a responsible budget canal propel the economy forward. .. we would have just carrier strike crews. if

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Texas , Iran , Myrtle Beach , South Carolina , Boston , Massachusetts , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , Ford School , Michigan , Georgia , Washington , Bonn , Nordrhein Westfalen , Germany , Mississippi , Pakistan , San Francisco , California , Ukraine , United Kingdom , Town Hall , Maryland , Georgetown University , Paris , Rhôalpes , France , Chicago , Illinois , Britain , America , American , Jacqueline Berrien , Pamela Miller , Brian Bennett , Lauren Wilson , Martin Luther King , Al Sharpton , Los Angeles , Betsey Stevenson , Lilly Ledbetter , Edward Montgomery , Betsy Stevenson , John Kerry , Mike Wilson , Billy Huggins , Tom Wheeler , Jacqueline Berrien Edward Montgomery , Amanda Mcmillan , Nelson Mandela , Allison Clark , David Smith , Armstrong Williams , Tim Ryan ,