@@Okay_mate Legislation is amended by Parliament. The relevant law would have been put forward by the relevant Minister. In short - elected government, not public servants.
@@design7054 if you're being honest with yourself, no you wouldn't. And since there's significant government resources dedicated to the problem, it allows groups to focus on things like imbalances in superannuation.
"Our budget size is tailored to be sufficiënt to collect the mandated data" Seriously, expecting bureaucrats to go above and beyond their mandate is a bit naive.
Funny how we NEVER hear about 50/50 discriminating quotas for:- * Garbo * Sewage workers * Mowing lawns * Landscaping * Plumbers * Electricians * Snake catchers * Night Petrol station attendant * Construction * Mining * road crews * IT/PC repair * Power pole repair #equality
@@BramBiesiekierski Bram, absolutely , I am a roof carpenter and have been for over 30 years. Like you, I made a choice. I have stayed with it while you went off to do something else. That's what these clowns just don't get. Women make a choice too. Not many choose to be chippies, garbos, auto electricians, deep sea fishermen. That's their choice and if there's a gender gap it's because women want it. It suits them 100%
I work in Waste Water and often drive by "More Women in IT Roles" protests on the commute to the waste water treatment plant. Never a protest where I park my car.
@@JS-tm1gq well, he knows that whole matter is total bullshit but he still can calmly process matter and get what he wants after opponent has dig deep enough hole where they can be buried.
Sounds like this is another department that deserves the axe, as they are a waste of time. Potentially covered by other organisations that handle it better.
absolutely! do a search through the departments... anything with "gender" or "equality" in it's title you can safely axe, sure they'll be a bunch of staff without jobs but they'll also be a lot of cats being petted more often. this tactic should also be applied to universities, literally ANY entity with those terms in their title should go.
Next topic, what are we gonna do about the pregnancy gap? I did a year of paid research and found out that more women than men get pregnant. How can we let men contribute more to compensate the pregnancy gap? I support a tax on men so women can stay home and take care of the children that men decide not to have so men should pay for that!
So what she is saying is that once you redesign the workplace equipment women can get the equality they want. But until then men can keep on dying to make more money on the equipment that needs to be redesigned. Makes sense.
"Does the act prevent you from collecting data on workplace safety?" "We collect data on 6 gender equality indicators". How is that an answer to the question?
@@lusti6511 "We collect data on all these useless, fantasy indicators that I can't even name without reading from a paper, but safety on the work place? Fuck that"
She is only interested in the narrative that support their agenda. She has to be very stupid indeed not to understand or know the causes of the 'pay gap' ..
Exactly the point - As psychology will tell you, women will seek resources at almost any cost. In this case women have constructed a narrative in which they are the victims and men are the perpertrators. In doing so, they are not only creating jobs based on this falsity, but also trying to accrue money for work not done (gender pay gap). Let's face it, we are just apes.
Not interested in comparing hours worked, or job actually done, or job safety. In other words, not interested in any important facts, just in campaigning for undeserved advantages, and for only one "gender." That's one heck of a data-gathering agency.
I went for a job once at a pig farm! The job involved cleaning up shit and helping the pigs fuck! And guess what 15 other people were applying for it all males! I heard one girl was offered the job without even applying and she turned it down because it was gross and smelled (her words not mine)
they want the equality of being able to work the safe jobs, but also to get the pay of the dangerous jobs without having to put in the effort of said jobs. They want the reward given for doing long hard work without having to go through doing the long hard work if they don't choose to do it. Its like a little kid wanting to use cheat codes for rewards in their games without having to work hard to unlock it, but if the game doesn't allow cheat codes and forces you to unlock the reward through progress/hard work the kid will scream that the game is broken/unfair. This is literally every feminist and woman that support it's mindset with life.
How do these people reach such power? It is mind boggling. Leyonhjelm knows he is the last line of defense in some cases. Heroes never get the gratitude they deserve by enough people!
@@josephj6521... Good argument for justification of 5 people of the one sex on a gender equality committee. If it was 5 males, it would be a problem also.
@@josephj6521 that's choice based we vote for women to become pm and there quite a few Ceos who are women moreover, how many people...humans even become CEO's don't see the point there but I guarantee there isn't a voting system to get on that board of women so big difference.
Lovely to see these women who are paid well above their grade, fishing among themselves for answers not even half-baked, in order to respond to the senators fair questions.
Our problems all stem from this. We have employable men who are homeless that we could rehabilitate. Instead we hire and overpay idiots that get paid to talk about being a woman or being gay. Nobody gives a shit
Wait! They fight the gender pay gap so they have to pay high wages to women for doing nothing. This way the pay gap is lowered by 0.001%. If they are given bonuses the effect is even 0.002%. Multiply by 1000 agencies and NGOs and success is here- 1-2% lower pay gap. It is not important how much you work. In another video she said it directly- "If you stay for 12 hours this does not mean you do more work.". Of course. Women do all the work and why we even pay men to do nothing?
Absolutely guarantee there were no men involved in setting the parameters for that QANGO. Do we really need leaders and organisations in our communities whose capacity for compassion and protective instincts apply to only half the population.
Not one rat's arse is given by this woman. All the easy, safe blue collar job's used to go to older tradesmen as they neared retirement. Now only young women (usually related to the boss) get to be store man, Peggie (lunch room cleaner) etc. After a lifetime of hard work in the sun, you keep doing it until 67 or get thrown on the scrap heap. Employer job screening is usually done by very young women, so older tradesmen are considered dinosaurs. Welcome to the service economy.
It's the same here in the U.S. mate. The feminists will use what ever they think will advance their agenda. It's not about fundamental fairness or "equality" any longer. It's become about having perpetual "victim status" that the liberal left so prizes. Hell, they invent things to play the victim about now and it would seem many women want to get in on it. Hence the "metoo" movement. I'm not saying that there haven't been women who have been harassed, because I'm quite certain there are women who have been. But asking everyone to believe them with absolutely no proof or due process to the ones they accuse is absurd in the extreme. Thing is, they wouldn't want to be subjected to that same standard of "justice" they would inflict on others. This isn't our grandmother's brand of feminism any longer. They just want MORE.....and if you even ask relevant questions then you MUST be a "misogynist" and a "patriarchal oppressor". Name calling and labels have taken the place of reasoned, logical, rational, fact based debate. One of the huge problems with all of this is, if women actually get what they say they want, they won't want to live in a world like that for very long. Women now, in western societies have it better than at any other time in history. Frankly, I don't think women would be able to deal with a society where they don't have the advantage of traditionalism, the society they are accustom to now. In saying that my experience with many of these 3rd wave feminists is that the depth of their belief is only situational. They are equality minded feminists in one circumstance but are just as comfortable playing the "weak female" in others....it all depends on what is to their advantage in those given circumstances.
“We didn’t look at it, so it must not be important.” This is their argument... this is their defense. And when they don’t get their way they will cry sexism and systemic oppression, and double down on their agenda... Instead of learning from their mistake, doing better research, and cooperating instead of always taking an oppositional approach.
Any men in the "Gender Equality Workplace Agency", no, thought not. What about addressing that or is it not considered an "issue" if men are not equally represented.
Would love this gentleman to visit the UK, and chair a few committees in our parliament. Brilliant interrogator, calmly harnessing the power of silence to let the fools expose themselves. Salute you, sir 👏👏👏👏👏
Senator David Leyonhjelm, you are the VOICE OF REASON. Please keep up the good work you are doing, and do not allow these idiotic one-sided people to get you down. l saw you on "the project" and you held yourself well. l would like to pledge my full support for you and please take note of how many "likes" your video clip has.......God bless you
@@TheRampantLion No. They wanted equal outcome. Equality would be that they have same free choice to pursuit their ambitions in the work field. If women want to do hard work in construction site they would be hitting the gym and be tougher than your average man. However most of the women don't want to work that hard. Nordic countries are amazing examples of the equality of free choice, not equal outcome.
@@newera478 Except here in Sweden were women gets to skip the line and have lower requirements put on them when it comes to education, the military, the police force, and leading positions.
@@phonox Well we aren't perfect here in Finland either. But generally speaking we are doing somewhat decent compared to rest of the world. Wouldn't you agree? Interesting that you mentioned military. You've mandatory conscription these days for men and women? But only for a small part of the age group. We still have mandatory conscription for men here in Finland. And by mandatory in our case it means you either go do civil service or military service, if you deny both you get sent to jail for six months. Women are freed from conscription. So they have 6-12 months more time to do studying or work.
@@newera478 It's "mandatory" again since 2017, after they stopped it back in 2010, but all you have to do is tell the psychologist that you're not interested and you're free to go. The women only has to do a tenth of what the men do, get regular fika-meetings to network (complain) with other women, and are usually elevated to a commanding position. They tried to do the same thing with the firefighters but luckily it hasn't gotten too much traction yet outside the more extremist places.
Nah they only looked at the annual wage not hourly wage If they looked at the hourly wage they’d find out women are being paid more (google done this study and found that out themselves apparently)
When will the numbers of inmates in prison be regulated by the government? At the moment, it might be at 90% male to 10% female prisoners...it has to be 50/50!
It's fine by me if you want to advocate on behalf of women's interests. I just get peeved when an organization who advocates solely on behalf of women styles itself a force for overall gender equality.
I'll always find it funny that those equality boards never have any biological untransitioned men as members. That was also the case 20 years ago at the university I went to briefly. The equality comission was comprised solely of women, while every other comission had men and women. Not always in a 50/50 split, but never unigender either.
I think my employers have ripped me off my whole life. I was getting the same hourly rate as women doing the same job, when I was meant to be getting paid more! I feel victimised 😂
This guy is an absolute GEM. He succinctly exposes the one-eyed outlook of this particular (and, frankly, ALL) gender equality/inequality workgroups that focus ONLY on data that supports their constant assertion that women continue to be oppressed in society and the workplace.
I think it's a strategy of dancing around the issue to run out the clock on the senator's time. If it was direct question/answer you'd quickly get to the point where she couldn't defend herself anymore - i.e., a Jordan Peterson/Cathy Newman style blowup.
Here are some factors on why men tend to earn more - * Men choose higher paying jobs. Women tend to focus on jobs caring for others - teachers, nurses, daycare, home health workers, etc...while men enjoy STEM fields which are higher paying. * Men put in more hours at work than women do and therefore are earning more if paid by the hour or earn more in commissions for making more sales. * Because men put in more hours and maybe work nights and weekends, they get more experience and are therefore more valuable which justifies pay raises and promotions. * Women often leave the workforce to have kids. This means that when/if they return, they have to start from scratch while the men who were hired originally with the women have been promoted. * Women aren't as aggressive in negotiating their pay when hired and/or promoted nor are they as aggressive in seeking/demanding promotions. * Women are more likely to stay with a company that turned them down for a raise/promotion. They are risk adverse. Men are less afraid of risk and will look elsewhere if they are passed over for a promotion or are denied a raise. Companies know this and therefore are more likely to give men that raise/promotion rather than face the higher risk of them leaving. * Since women work less than men, companies aren't going to offer women promotions if the promotion would require them to work longer hours. Women won't accept such promotions as often as men and the companies know that she is likely to turn it down so they offer it to the equally qualified man rather than having the man knowing that he was the 2nd choice. * Since women tend to seek husbands who earn more than they do, women are much more likely to have a higher earning spouse than a man. This means that the women will be less likely to accept a promotion requiring more time/travel since she may not need the money as much as the man with a lower earning spouse. the woman's husband is also less likely to accept the wife being on the job more hours and he will also be less willing to move if the woman's promotion requires it. He may not be able to make the same money if the new town while the spouse of the male employee will be much more likely to find similar paying work. These factors discourage women from accepting such promotions and knowing this, the company is also less likely to offer it to a woman over an equally qualified man. * Women with higher earning husbands feel less pressure to enter less attractive, but higher paying fields. They gravitate to jobs that they like. Men tend to have lower earning spouses and therefore are forced to choose higher paying jobs, even if it's much less enjoyable. All of the above show why men, on an annual basis, earn more than women. There is nothing that attributes the difference to sexism. It's all about personal choices.
She did say they were supposed to closely look at gender equality in the workplace. that is not exclusive but rather inclusive. There of course is a direct link between dangerous jobs and better pay, and that is why they won't look at workplace safety unless they are directed to do so.
Holy crap talk about stacked data. What scared me was the earlier one when they told him how they arrive at the annual income based on the contract yearly income not the actual amount of hours the individual actually does. That scared me totally. The whole thing based on hypothetical figures.
they looked at the yearly actual pay alongside contract hours rather than the actual hours worked for that year which is clearly available alongside the actual pay. just didn't use it because it wouldn't have helped them.
More women will work in male dominated industry, if there is a redesign of equipment. What does she mean? For instance, I'm a mechanic that has worked in stinking hot workshops for years. I don't see anything holding back women for undertaking the same job? I can think of a dozen other jobs in the same situation.
"For instance, I'm a mechanic that has worked in stinking hot workshops for years. I don't see anything holding back women for undertaking the same job?" Lack of air-conditioning might be holding them back LoL.
Wow.. she has a lot of answers when it comes to things to benefit womens pay, but when it comes to actually rolling up your sleeves and DOING labor these "strong and empowered" women sure seem to shrink away and not have any answers lol
I work as a carpenter, I have been severely injured twice in the last 15 yrs. Never have I met a female plumper, Electrition, roofer or waterproofer. I have had one female carpenter, she lasted 2 days ( I’m very patient and I very much wanted a female carpenter as a employee) but she was the worst worker I have ever had. I would bet there is a very real reason why they do not collect this info. They also take no note of hours worked. I have never met a woman who puts in the hours I do. Ever
It was made quite clear in this exchange: the legislation was designed solely to promote women at the expense of men, not gender equality/equity. It was prejudged by the wording of the legislation.
Nah, being non aggressive, rational, strictly logical and non-emotional is the ONLY winning strategy against feminists (for example Jordan Peterson vs Cathy Newman). It's like Aikido - you use someone's emotionality, aggression (and lack of reliance on facts) against themselves.
This is hilarious. The parameters she quotes are all so vague, yet straightforward issues like death and injury at work are nowhere to be found. What a glorious example of how contrived all of this ideological BS is. This is an issue that transparently lacks intellectual honesty or integrity. Where are the campaigns for more women on fishing trawlers or doing sewer maintenance? It’s an embarassment that these hacks make a living from this.
Put another way would she bring up the disparity if the sistuation were reversed? Of course she would. It's very clear this person doesnt want equity and fairness for women. She wants advantages for women over men.
“More women will work in what we’re traditionally male dominated work sites, *WITH A REDESIGN OF EQUIPMENT and watevr* “ Who’s going to pay for this? You want equality you shouldn’t need a redesign of equipment
If women are equal to men please explain why the top 50 Chess players are men. The top 50 Formula 1 drivers are men. The 100 Red bull air challenge pilots are men.
Simple. Reality is very different from the propaganda and feminist lies. Read the Guinness Book of World Records and see if you can find a world record held by a woman in anything.
Ah, but according to this woman, if you re- design the aircraft, re- design the Formula one cars, and re-design the chess sets; then Women will perform at the same level!
Note that she does not answer the question about equality of safety.Their counter-argument would be - yes, women return home safely from work - only to be beaten by their husbands!
How are they not embarrassed? This Senator just ripped every argument they had apart with very simple questions about compensation from employment. That gentleman is the hero of the day in my book
That’s just lazy, they just want to check the boxes and say “look we care about gender inequality” when if they really cared, they’d make sure things like SAFETY were at the forefront of concerns. How on earth does composition outweigh safety when it comes to gender inequality.
