The New York Times, one of the biggest newspapers in the world, is embroiled in a scandal involving its recently fired executive editor, Jill Abramson, who may have, or may have not, been paid less than her male predecessor.
I say may or may not because the real story is murky. The publisher of the newspaper Arthur Sulzberger claimed in a memo that she actually made more: “In 2013, her last full year in the role, her total compensation package, was more than 10% higher than that of her predecessor…”
He doesn’t talk about whether Abramson was hired at a lower rate when she was brought on.
Media reports say Abramson was indeed paid less, and a photo of her in boxing gloves has many speculating that she’s ready to fight back.
This story shines light on how difficult it is to prove gender pay bias, even in a situation involving a high level executive and a newspaper that touts itself as wanting to expose the truth.
What hope does a rank and file employee at a corporation not interested in truth have? (more…)