“The numbers don’t lie,”
December 12, 2018 8:39 PM   Subscribe

Elizabeth Rowe has sued the BSO. Her case could change how orchestras pay men and women. [The Washington Post] The Boston Symphony Orchestra is one of the country's "big five" orchestras. There are 95 musicians in the orchestra — 63 men and 32 women. Principal flutist Elizabeth Rowe sits next to principal oboist John Ferrillo. She's paid $64,451 less than him a year.
“Money is the one thing that we can look to to measure people’s value in an organization,” Rowe says. “You look at the number of women that graduate from conservatories and then you look at the number of women in the top leadership positions in orchestras, and it’s not 50-50 still. Women need to see equality, and they need to see fairness in order to believe that that’s possible.”
posted by Fizz (70 comments total) 34 users marked this as a favorite
 
Why You Should Tell Your Co-Workers How Much Money You Make 08/31/18 Tim Herrera for NYT
posted by carsonb at 8:53 PM on December 12, 2018 [16 favorites]


Classical music is so horrifyingly patriarchal it's nearly impossible to fathom. That female players are working to get equal pay is amazing. To get equal demographics in orchestras feels unlikely within a generation. To get equal demographics in conductors would require generations of culture changes and active recruitment outside of what has ever happened before. To get equal representation amongst composers is... unlikely within our current cultural era.

Still, beginning steps are worthwhile, and I hope they continue to fight!
posted by hippybear at 8:56 PM on December 12, 2018 [12 favorites]


Always glad to see and hear all the women on stage with the Boise Philharmonic (they outnumber men 43 to 33). But most of the principals are still men.
posted by straight at 9:20 PM on December 12, 2018


I was just talking with coworkers about the need for full transparency in workplace salaries and my friend, a minority woman, said “But you have to be really careful because people’s feelings could get hurt.” I could not convince her that those hurt feeling should be spurring them to talk to management about being compensated better. Not to start workplace drama. Sigh. Habits die hard, man.
posted by greermahoney at 9:21 PM on December 12, 2018 [21 favorites]


“My personal experience is that I have not seen or found gender bias within the overscale structures that I’ve worked,” says Jonathan Martin, president of the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra, where 13 of 15 principals are men.
Oh, is that your personal experience, Jonathan? Is it?!? I wonder why or how that could possibly be.

The Post investigation, however, showed that when such discrepancies can be identified, they almost always benefit men.
I'm shocked, I tell you. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
posted by sockermom at 9:21 PM on December 12, 2018 [53 favorites]


Companies will try to hire people for the lowest cost possible, to make the largest profit. Sharing our pay makes it harder for them to do that. I remember once as a senior analyst, I found out the junior analyst on my team earned more than me, despite spending most of her career working part time, so I guess yay for some balance on the other side of the scale for part time child rearing moms?

I am pretty open with what I earn, and hopefully by sharing where I am it gives other people a starting point or seed of an idea that they should be paid more. In one case, I earned around 2.5x what someone else did, with the same field and qualifications. I made it a point to say that this pay is "normal" in the field (or, the field generally pays $X, while I am paid $Y, but I was willing to accept the lower rate for other benefits) rather than me bragging about what I was earning as a result of me being exceptional or something, which would really feel like rubbing it in someone's noses if you earned more than twice what they did. We had a separate talk later and I encouraged her to shop around and get a higher paying position and she did.
posted by xdvesper at 9:24 PM on December 12, 2018 [5 favorites]


My official HR handbook says that we are free to discuss our salaries with our co-workers, and that it is in no way discouraged, and that there will be no retaliation for organizing to bargain for better wages.

I was in the Director's office the other day and was told to my face that I was making more than four other people who do the same thing I do and that I was not, under any circumstances, to tell them this, because they might "get mad."

... we're just screwed either way.
posted by tzikeh at 9:48 PM on December 12, 2018 [14 favorites]


I'd love to hear more from people who have successfully shared salary information with their coworkers.

The closest I got was when a few college friends of mine organized an anonymous survey. We were all of a similar age and with similar credentials, and we were trying to get a feel for rates around the country. I was the highest, and I felt surprisingly guilty about that. (To be fair, I was the lone New Yorker among a bunch of Midwesterners, some of them from places rural enough they had septic fields instead of sewers.)
posted by meaty shoe puppet at 9:48 PM on December 12, 2018 [4 favorites]


>The BSO, in a statement, defended its pay structure, saying that the flute and oboe are not comparable, in part because the oboe is more difficult to play and there is a larger pool of flutists.

>In the group listed in tax filings, there is an instance when the principal flute player is a man and the principal oboe is a woman in the same orchestra. St. Louis Symphony Orchestra flute player Mark Sparks earned $166,191 in 2016, according to the most recent tax documents; principal oboist Jelena Dirks doesn’t rank high enough to be listed on tax returns.

mmmkay
posted by Cozybee at 10:19 PM on December 12, 2018 [50 favorites]


I'd love to hear more from people who have successfully shared salary information with their coworkers.

previously: What happens when you talk about salaries at Google
posted by ryanrs at 10:21 PM on December 12, 2018 [2 favorites]


Whenever I run into a job applicant at my employer, I always point out that we're government employees and our salaries are public, so it's easy to look up the salary paid to the last person who held that empty job position.
posted by nicebookrack at 10:37 PM on December 12, 2018 [16 favorites]


Yeah, everyone knows what everyone makes where I work, so no difference there. Everyone is very much paid the same at whatever level you are. There's no moving up or raises other than the occasional cost of living, mind you, but it's fair to everyone.

Anyway, good luck to Elizabeth, the difference between her and that guy is astounding. A penis is worth $64k?!?
posted by jenfullmoon at 11:02 PM on December 12, 2018


I'm surprised that nowhere in the article is there any discussion of seniority. The oboe player is 19 years older than the flute player, has been with the orchestra 3 years longer, and was the principal oboe player of the Met for 15 years before that. Would paying the two of them the same salary really be the most appropriate outcome here? Perhaps in a truly fair world, salaries would depend only on experience.

In any case, part of the management's defense is the claim that the oboe is more difficult to play that the flute, and that just seems crazy and thoroughly disingenuous to me.
posted by epimorph at 12:05 AM on December 13, 2018 [23 favorites]


Well you don't see any prog rock frontmen up on one leg playing an oboe
posted by thelonius at 2:35 AM on December 13, 2018 [14 favorites]


Of course the article doesn't mention senority nor the fact that he was enticed to leave the Met for Boston Such logical reasons for pay difference would diminish the myth of gender pay difference.

She is paid more than 8 male principal players. Is her higher pay unfair discrimination or just her lower pay?

And of course she was hired under a blind audition specifically so that gender wouldn't matter

As xdvesper companies will hire people at the lowest salary they can. If so, why hire men at all?

If a red head is paid less than a brunette is the difference in pay because of ginger-discrimination?

correlation is not causation
posted by 2manyusernames at 3:47 AM on December 13, 2018 [5 favorites]


For anyone who is tempted to discuss pay with their coworkers, but is discouraged from doing so by company policies or by management statements, you should know that pay discussions among workers are protected by the National Labor Relations Act*. Company policies that prohibit such discussions are illegal.**


* There are minor exceptions. HR people can't disclose others' pay rates. Some municipal employees can't talk about their pay.

** The first link above is to Insperity, a company that manages pay and benefits for other companies that don't want to bear the burden of doing it in-house. I worked for a company that used Insperity. The client company's employee handbook did include a policy prohibiting pay discussions. None of us tested it.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:49 AM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


And of course she was hired under a blind audition specifically so that gender wouldn't matter

But pay negotiations were done after, when her gender was known (and she asserts that it did and does matter). Her hiring is not at issue, but her pay is.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:51 AM on December 13, 2018 [34 favorites]


Good job, you found a plausible reason why this specific example of inequality might not be due to misogyny. Hold tight, I'll be right back—I've got another 10,000 for you to rationalize away, and there's another truckload due in an hour. We'll have sexism solved dismissed by end of day.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 3:56 AM on December 13, 2018 [62 favorites]


Her hiring is not at issue, but her pay is.

Fair enough, but the other points are still valid as is that the demand for oboeist is the same for flutists but the supply of flutist is lower than that of oboeists.

This would be a greater salary for oboeist on average - not every individual case
posted by 2manyusernames at 3:59 AM on December 13, 2018


Good job, you found a plausible reason why this specific example of inequality might not be due to misogyny. Hold tight, I'll be right back—I've got another 10,000 for you to rationalize away, and there's another truckload due in an hour. We'll have sexism solved dismissed by end of day.

Misogyny? Well the orchestra must be one serious misogynist. One that puts their money where their mouth is by paying the man more instead of hiring a woman for less.

Examples of pay inequality have been rationalized time after time after time after time. One could say that gender inequality - especially when it comes to traditional family role expectations has an effect on many cases of pay differences but women aren't paid less solely because they are women.
posted by 2manyusernames at 4:06 AM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


Misogyny? Well the orchestra must be one serious misogynist.

Yes, that is what we are saying.

women aren't paid less solely because they are women.

They are though, this has been demonstrated countless times from countless different angles with this case being just the latest in a long, long line.

One could say that gender inequality - especially when it comes to traditional family role expectations has an effect on many cases of oay differences

Yes it does, and it's unjust and in many cases illegal. Why are you saying it as if you think it's somehow fine and natural?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 4:26 AM on December 13, 2018 [24 favorites]


the article doesn't mention senority nor the fact that he was enticed to leave the Met for Boston
Funny, both facts were in the article I read.
Ferrillo joined the BSO 3 years before Rowe. And no matter what previous positions he held, Massachusetts law states "employees’ salary histories are not relevant or a defense to an employer's liability."

the demand for oboeist is the same for flutists but the supply of flutist is lower than that of oboeists.
But the BSO is also claiming that a principal oboeist deserves higher pay due to greater responsibilities, which makes the counterexample (where the male flutist is paid more than his female oboeist colleague) relevant.

I'm also curious how "routine" overscale pay really is among "all principals" given the BSO's refusal in her case.
Rowe says management also would not make her “overscale” — the term for what all principals routinely receive over their base pay — a percentage of her base, which would allow her to avoid asking for a raise every year.
posted by cheshyre at 4:30 AM on December 13, 2018 [6 favorites]


Anyway, good luck to Elizabeth, the difference between her and that guy is astounding. A penis is worth $64k?!?

No, being a man is (allegedly) worth $64k.
posted by yaymukund at 4:34 AM on December 13, 2018 [8 favorites]


It would be interesting to see a study of whether and how transgender people's pay changes after they transition, compared to the pay changes of cisgender people over a similar period of time. Do they shift toward the median for their actual gender or not? Does the penalty for being trans in the first place (which I assume exists, though I've not seen research) tend to shrink or grow? Does it differ significantly for transmasculine and transfeminine people? What about nonbinary people?

I wonder if anyone has done this research yet, they all seem like eminently answerable questions.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 4:40 AM on December 13, 2018 [6 favorites]


The oboe player is 19 years older than the flute player, has been with the orchestra 3 years longer, and was the principal oboe player of the Met for 15 years before that. Would paying the two of them the same salary really be the most appropriate outcome here? Perhaps in a truly fair world, salaries would depend only on experience.

"Experience" and "tenure" are used as a proxy for ability, as they're easier to estimate and enumerate. In a fair world (if differing salaries are justified at all), a younger but more talented employee deserves the higher salary.

We expect that the employee with more experience has more ability, and that is often the case, but not always, and there's often a plateau. She's been with them for 15 years; the difference between 15 years and 33 years isn't nearly as much as, say, 2 years and 10.
posted by explosion at 5:01 AM on December 13, 2018 [7 favorites]


It's entirely possible that this one pay discrepancy isn't about sex, I suppose, but I also think that looking for justification for why it isn't is socially and morally icky thing to do when there's an enormous patter of sex- and gender-based pay discrepancy in our society. It's sort of like saying "What's so bad about smoking? My grandfather smoked a pack a day until he got hit by a truck at the age of 104."

I also think that context matters and a big part of the context is the industry's history with blind auditions:

In 1970, women made up fewer than 5 percent of the players in the big five. [Orchestras started using screens in audition processes.] The screens made a difference. The New York Philharmonic, for example, has gone from 90 men and 26 women in 1993 to its current makeup of 48 men and 44 women.

What this is telling us is that the industry's employment process was rife with discrimination. It seems exceptionally silly to wave one's hand and say "Ah, this one thing solved sexism, it probably hasn't invaded other areas of the industry's practice."
posted by entropone at 5:57 AM on December 13, 2018 [18 favorites]


I must have been way out of touch from the band geek world, because I’m floored that you can make well into the six figures playing in an orchestra.
posted by dr_dank at 6:00 AM on December 13, 2018 [5 favorites]


Sure, if you're a principal in one of the top 5 most prestigious orchestras in the nation—I doubt that median pay is anywhere close to that. Kind of like you can make millions as a pop star, but the vast majority of musicians are lucky if they can get a regular weekend gig in their local bar.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 6:08 AM on December 13, 2018 [17 favorites]


Of course the article doesn't mention senority nor the fact that he was enticed to leave the Met for Boston Such logical reasons for pay difference would diminish the myth of gender pay difference.

She is paid more than 8 male principal players. Is her higher pay unfair discrimination or just her lower pay?


Quoting the damn article: "A Post analysis of tax records and orchestra rosters shows that although women make up nearly 40 percent of the country’s top orchestras, when it comes to the principal, or titled, slots, 240 of 305 — or 79 percent — are men. The gap is even greater in the “big five” — the orchestras in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Philadelphia and New York. Women occupy just 12 of 73 principal positions in those orchestras.

There is a direct link between principal positions and pay, the Post examination found. Only 14 of the 78 musicians in those top orchestras earning enough to be listed on tax filings are women."

Your cherry-picking is directly refuted right there in black and white.
posted by soundguy99 at 6:28 AM on December 13, 2018 [22 favorites]


I’m floored that you can make well into the six figures playing in an orchestra.

Base tuition for the Cleveland Institute of Music - one of the few conservatories that produces musicians able to land top spots in orchestras - has just been reduced to $40,000 a year, total estimated cost for a resident student being (pdf link) $69,404. And that's undergraduate degrees, and doesn't include years of private lessons and trips to camps and seminars. Plus the cost of orchestral-grade instruments, which can hit five figures no problem.

Just for some perspective on what it costs to get to a point where you might be able to earn six figures as a classical musician.
posted by soundguy99 at 6:47 AM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


Yeah so what you have to understand is that the classical music world has been proving that it was (and is, but it is nice to see the movement) gender biased with lots of data on implementing screens for auditions. Sadly, when it comes to composing or conducting, areas of classical music where you can't implement screens, the numbers continue to be abysmal.

Saying that someone has more experience misses some of the point here. Getting into classical music requires a lot of money and a lot of time; growing a classical music career requires a lot of opportunity to study with the right people, work with the right orchestras, get the right chances to advance.

That merely changing to screened auditions even with everything else in play changed the composition of orchestras so rapidly shows the depth of the misogyny. That the other parts - pay, principal seats, conductors, directors, composers - haven't makes it clear that it's not that women aren't good enough/don't play rare enough instruments/can't gain experience. It makes it clear that wherever you can throw up roadblocks in front of women in music, there are a ton.

I've worked for a prestigious classical music institution and the amount of gender (and racial) bias was astonishing, and that was working with a team where some of the senior leadership was visibly leading the charge to change the industry.
posted by warriorqueen at 6:52 AM on December 13, 2018 [22 favorites]


and the amount of gender (and racial) bias was astonishing,

As my exposure to the classical world is through popular musicians who were pushed out, I can't say that I am astonished
posted by eustatic at 7:04 AM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


Companies will try to hire people for the lowest cost possible, to make the largest profit. Sharing our pay makes it harder for them to do that.

I used to believe this too. I'm more and more convinced that companies don't want us to discuss pay because they all -- every one of them -- know that they're paying men more, whites more, cishets more, etc. etc. etc., and that throwing open the blinds and letting everyone see what everyone else makes would render it glaringly obvious that they're not hiring based on some perfect, unemotional Homo economicus rationale.
posted by Etrigan at 7:17 AM on December 13, 2018 [5 favorites]


Sadly, when it comes to composing or conducting, areas of classical music where you can't implement screens, the numbers continue to be abysmal.

Composing can't be done anonymously?
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:26 AM on December 13, 2018 [1 favorite]


a note on the tenure/seniority argument:

1. screened auditions were put in place between 1970-1990
2. therefore, there are people hired before 1970 (or whenever it was implemented in their specific orchestra) who have more tenure than people hired after, because those people are male.

so specifically in this case, there is known to be a totally sexist reason for why the musicians with the most orchestra tenure are all male.
posted by Cozybee at 7:37 AM on December 13, 2018 [15 favorites]


Misogyny? Well the orchestra must be one serious misogynist. One that puts their money where their mouth is by paying the man more instead of hiring a woman for less.

The fact that they hire men isn't really evidence that they're not misogynists. If an institution was misogynistic, it wouldn't be surprising at all to see them hiring more men because they'd be seen as having more value.

Maybe if an institution was both misogynistic and super cheap (wanting to spend the least amount of money possible, regardless of any other consequences), then maybe you'd see them hire only women.
posted by ghost phoneme at 7:39 AM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


Like with administrative assistants, for instance.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 7:42 AM on December 13, 2018 [3 favorites]


I would not be surprised if the median orchestral salary for American conservatory graduates, all together, was zero dollars per year. I graduated from a major conservatory in a class with 20 other people on my instrument and I don't think more than 2 of us (20 years later) make a regular paycheck by playing that instrument, let alone in a full-time orchestra. The overall numbers are super-bleak and extremely easy to work out like a Fermi estimation problem.

Meanwhile the gradient in salaries is ridiculous. A few years ago I realized a bit of a life goal and now reliably get a W2 every year from one of the Big 5, though just for occasional work. (For those keeping track, that's more than 15 years after I received a master's degree in this.) The instant that started it became financial malpractice for me to accept other gigs at some parts of the year - in one concert with the Big Kids we get paid as much as an entire 10-concert series with the next-best regional orchestra, 100 miles away.

So that's the backdrop for all of this. Winning a job with the BSO is comparable to winning the lottery, if you had to get an advanced degree and study for 10 years afterwards before they let you buy a ticket.

Given the history of misogyny in orchestras and the wealth of data we have about differential outcomes for men and women in salary negotiations generally, I have to assume she's completely right. Unfortunately her closest comparable performer in the orchestra is himself a total unicorn - and this is not really his fault, but when Ferrillo joined the orchestra they had been unable/unwilling to fill the principal oboe vacancy for FOUR YEARS, and the orchestra backed a dump truck of money into his house in a (successful) effort to poach him from the Met Orchestra.
posted by range at 7:45 AM on December 13, 2018 [17 favorites]


A timely aside: last week, in a moment of outrage, I emailed a local classical public radio DJ because I was tired of him repeatedly commenting on the motherhood status of female musicians. I wrote that due to his sexist double-standard of not making similar comments about men, it has the effect of diminishing these women’s professional accomplishments. (I did not write that his comments creep me out on a visceral level - why is this man obsessing about the personal lives of female performers?)

This week I received a very long response in which he mansplained how hard it is to be a parent and a musician and how he is actually CELEBRATING these women! He attached an mp3 of an interview he did with a male performer 15 years ago who was a new dad. He closed his email with a comment about Bach’s 20 kids and how the station plays their music, too. And I just... Ugh.

Sexism is everywhere in classical music.

(In the opposite of obsession, the director of my community orchestra did not learn my name until I called him out after 4 years and asked him why he immediately learned the men’s names. Still sexist...)
posted by Maarika at 7:46 AM on December 13, 2018 [12 favorites]


Composing can't be done anonymously?

Nope. Money quote: "Music directors and board committees know whose music they are choosing. “We’re completely at the mercy of the people who do the programming,” Higdon explains. “We have no control over our careers, basically, especially in the orchestral realm.”"
posted by warriorqueen at 8:00 AM on December 13, 2018 [8 favorites]


It would be interesting to see a study of whether and how transgender people's pay changes after they transition, compared to the pay changes of cisgender people over a similar period of time.

It isn't exactly about pay - more about interactions at work - but this article might be interesting.
posted by mosst at 8:21 AM on December 13, 2018


I'd be really curious to see what's going on with a hiring process where you're one of the most prestigious organizations in your industry, your labor pool has a nearly 100% unemployment rate within their chosen field, and yet it takes you years to fill a position and you have to make major financial concessions to convince someone to join your team. Like, what's up with that? Does the job come with like compulsory whippings, or something?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 8:47 AM on December 13, 2018 [4 favorites]


Sort of related previous MeFi threads:

- Candy floss and merry-go-rounds - features an article by composer Sarah Kirkland Snider on sexism in classical music

- ...until “the tiny errors became...so clear.” - auditioning for the MET Orchestra

- The Audition - for the Boston Symphony Orchestra

- Until I was a man, I had no idea how good men had it at work - article by Thomas Page McBee
posted by rangefinder 1.4 at 8:55 AM on December 13, 2018 [3 favorites]


Examples of pay inequality have been rationalized time after time after time after time. One could say that gender inequality - especially when it comes to traditional family role expectations has an effect on many cases of pay differences but women aren't paid less solely because they are women.
posted by 2manyusernames at 4:06 AM on December 13'

You're in for it now, 2manyusernames. I've had it up to here with comments like yours.

Look I'll say this up-front. I'm steaming mad at a similar discussion that's going on at another forum that I belong to. It's my oldest Internet home, and when I joined, I was careful to pick a gender neutral user name. I did so for a couple of reasons. The first is that it's a male dominated hobby with a male dominated forum. The second is that I've been a woman on the Internet for a very long time, and I know where that leads, and it's typically nowhere good.

So the general course of discussion over there is that "I've never seen this," "this doesn't happen" and "oh if it does happen, it's for actors and sports stars who need better agents."

I tried to explain that no, it happens in real life to non-famous people, but of course I was poo-poohed.

Unfortunately, I couldn't (since I'm not willing out myself) say it happened to me. And right now I'm telling you that explicitly so you can stop your "but women aren't paid less solely because they are women" bullshit.

If you want the specifics, since you seem so ready to nitpick the reasons why this can't possibly be happening here we go.

I was hired a few months before my male colleague, but we were essentially cohorts in seniority. if you're looking for an excuse, he had a slightly more advanced degree than I did, but that wasn't as requirement for the job. When I quit (in large part because I found out he was earning significantly more than I was) we still held similar positions, except for the fact that I had won an industry-recognized award and he hadn't, I was working on the flagship product and he wasn't, and our flagship product was making money whereas his was losing money. (Neither of us was involved in the revenue-generating side of the business, so we couldn't take credit or blame for that).

So there are your facts. He was making more money than me. Ah, but you'll say, this was a one-off situation. No it bloody well wasn't.

This company had a history of promoting its male employees over its women. There were women who had been there years longer than their male counterparts and who were never given the same opportunities as the guys. I ended up in the position I eventually had partly because the three women ahead of me finally quit out of frustration because they weren't getting the same raises and opportunities as the guys who were hired at the same time they were. As far as I can tell based on what I know of the people who continued to work there after I left, nothing changed after my departure. And I'll add this, I made my reasons for leaving very, very clear. It's not as if management didn't understand why I was upset.

So there, you can no longer say "but women aren't paid less solely because they are women" because today, on this very date one angry woman is telling you right here and right now that this happens, that it's real, that by denying the reality you're not only making it worse, you're personally offending every woman who has ever experienced this and you are calling ever woman who has ever been cheated out of their fair wages a liar.
posted by sardonyx at 9:00 AM on December 13, 2018 [65 favorites]


What people fear when fighting for equal pay:

EMPLOYER: "You're absolutely right! Let's lower that salary to make it equal with the others. There we are! All nice and equal! Thanks for bringing this to our attention!"
posted by prepmonkey at 9:08 AM on December 13, 2018 [3 favorites]


Oh man though, that would be the end for that employer though. Any sane employer knows that a move like that would put morale and productivity straight into the toilet forever. Granted, there are lots of insane ones.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 9:36 AM on December 13, 2018


So there, you can no longer say "but women aren't paid less solely because they are women" because today, on this very date one angry woman is telling you right here and right now that this happens, that it's real, that by denying the reality you're not only making it worse, you're personally offending every woman who has ever experienced this and you are calling ever woman who has ever been cheated out of their fair wages a liar.
Preach. Thank you.

The guy who got hired the year after me makes $13,880 more than I do. I know because our salaries are public. We're fairly equivalent along most measures, but he is a man and I am a woman.

I played hardball when I negotiated, but I was only able to tack on an additional $7k to my original offer in that negotiation process. I received other perks relevant to my line of work in the negotiation as well, but I was told that the salary they offered me was "the highest possible salary they could offer." I wonder why they were somehow able to offer my colleague what amounts to $20,000 more than they were able to originally offer me.

I'm guessing that the naysayers are the same types who prize "logic" over "feelings" and by extension probably want to see the science. "Anecdotes are simply not enough!" (I've seen a man scream this very phrase about a related issue at a faculty meeting, banging the table with his fist to emphasize each word). Good thing there's a veritable shit-ton of academic literature on this very fucking topic.
posted by sockermom at 10:04 AM on December 13, 2018 [27 favorites]


I (a man) was hired in my current job three and a half years ago as a... let's say Widget Fiddler II (of V). Not entry-level, because I have a little direct experience fiddling widgets, but not senior, because most of my applicable experience was in the Army and hard to quantify. My co-worker was hired about six months earlier, and has more direct widget-fiddling experience, but is a decade younger, and a woman. We did the same work, day-to-day.

After about two years, we compared salaries, and we were making about the same amount. We didn't think much of it -- as I noted, I had a lot of "other" experience. But then, a year later, she got promoted to Widget Fiddler Supervisor, a newly created position (that kinda took the place of Widget Fiddler V). When we had our first official boss-to-worker conference, it mostly consisted of the following conversation:

Etrigan: "I want to be promoted to Widget Fiddler III."
Boss: "You mean Widget Fiddler IV."
Etrigan: "Well, I'm pretty sure I'm a II, but sure. Either way, I'm going to be taking on more work that you used to do, and I feel like I've proven that I'm exceeding expectations at my current grade."
Boss: "Of course. I'll see what I can do. But I was a Widget Fiddler III, and we made the same amount."

The punchline: I had been hired at the maximum pay for a Widget Fiddler II, and she had been hired at the minimum pay for a Widget Fiddler III.

The chaser: If I get promoted to Widget Fiddler III and keep my max pay, I will be making more than she made after promotion to Widget Fiddler Supervisor.

So yeah, women have it hard, and saying that maybe this particular woman wasn't a victim of that, well... nah. Go fiddle your own widget with that shit.
posted by Etrigan at 10:13 AM on December 13, 2018 [27 favorites]


Whenever I run into a job applicant at my employer, I always point out that we're government employees and our salaries are public, so it's easy to look up the salary paid to the last person who held that empty job position.

Ditto for me and my employer. And yet this nominal transparency doesn't seem to have done much to stem the tide of salary inequity.
posted by Zed at 10:31 AM on December 13, 2018 [3 favorites]


The claim that gender-based income inequality doesn't exist is on par with climate change denial or flat-eartherism. It's unfortunate to see it here, and thanks to all the commenters above who have debunked this nonsense. Hopefully it doesn't totally derail the discussion.

The specific case in the FPP is a little weird though. Everyone involved is unimaginably well-off by the standards of my own life; the pay gap between the oboist and the floutist is literally greater than my entire salary. I wish her well in addressing the inequity, but I also can't help but think about the myriad ways poor working-class women deal with the same or worse inequities backwards and in thrift-store-bought shoes, so to speak. Maybe there's a trickle-down effect from changing the culture in places like the BSO, I don't know. Certainly we can care about both things, but I guess it's just difficult for me personally to feel too emotionally involved in the financial struggles of people who already make more than I probably ever will.
posted by biogeo at 10:33 AM on December 13, 2018 [10 favorites]


Sure, if you're a principal in one of the top 5 most prestigious orchestras in the nation—I doubt that median pay is anywhere close to that.

Indeed. An acquaintance is a tenured Flute in the Boston Ballet Orchestra, "the second largest musical organization in New England," and I know she isn't paid 6 figures.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 10:36 AM on December 13, 2018


warriorqueen: "Sadly, when it comes to composing or conducting, areas of classical music where you can't implement screens, the numbers continue to be abysmal."

I was gobsmacked when I read Alex Ross's recent New Yorker piece on Nico Muhly's new opera, which includes this: "The Met has presented only two operas by women in its history: Ethel Smyth’s “Der Wald,” in 1903; and Kaija Saariaho’s “L’Amour de Loin,” in 2016."

Two. TWO. I had to go back and read that again, I was so surprised.

(The next sentence: "The company recently signalled that it will begin to correct this dismal record by commissioning operas from Missy Mazzoli and Jeanine Tesori." Yay.)
posted by kristi at 10:42 AM on December 13, 2018 [4 favorites]


women aren't paid less solely because they are women.

You need to get back to your alternate universe fast, buddy--you don't seem to recognize what sort of world you've stumbled into.
posted by praemunire at 10:46 AM on December 13, 2018 [6 favorites]


I guess it's just difficult for me personally to feel too emotionally involved in the financial struggles of people who already make more than I probably ever will.

If they can crap on world-class professionals with advanced degrees and years of experience, they will surely do it on the perceived-replaceable-cogs at the dollar store. Though fixing one definitely does not fix the other, mind you.
posted by praemunire at 10:48 AM on December 13, 2018 [13 favorites]


The specific case in the FPP is a little weird though. Everyone involved is unimaginably well-off by the standards of my own life; the pay gap between the oboist and the floutist is literally greater than my entire salary. I wish her well in addressing the inequity, but I also can't help but think about the myriad ways poor working-class women deal with the same or worse inequities backwards and in thrift-store-bought shoes, so to speak. Maybe there's a trickle-down effect from changing the culture in places like the BSO, I don't know. Certainly we can care about both things, but I guess it's just difficult for me personally to feel too emotionally involved in the financial struggles of people who already make more than I probably ever will.

Well, this is one way you use your privilege to help those without it. Rowe is very well-off, but she's risking it (as well as her ability to get hired anywhere else) to litigate the issue of gender discrimination in pay. It won't directly help the women managers at your local big box store or fast casual chain, but it will lay groundwork to help them.

Of course, that's not necessarily Rowe's motive, but it is part of the impact of her pursuing her claims. Her pursuing her claims is part of caring about both things.

So I don't think the specific case is at all weird, regardless of the salaries or elite position of the woman at its center. Gender discrimination in salary and in wages exists and will continue to exist until employers are forced to stop. Over and over and over again. And until people--like those in this very thread--are crushed under the weight of evidence and consequence that no matter how many reasons you come up with, it's still illegitimate gender discrimination. Women making huge salaries have the ability to pursue their claims, as well as a better likelihood of finding new jobs, than do women making ordinary wages.
posted by crush at 10:48 AM on December 13, 2018 [18 favorites]


I guess it's just difficult for me personally to feel too emotionally involved in the financial struggles of people who already make more than I probably ever will.

People who work at old-money cultural institutions are expected to perform certain lifestyles. Rowe needs to own a place in Boston where she can get to the Symphony in crappy weather (and not get kicked out if she practices at home), and she has to own or rent a place in the Berkshires every summer (see this) because the BSO moves out to Tanglewood each year, and that means a car for her and probably one for her family as well. Yes it's doable on her salary. However I've seen jobs there paying entry-level salaries for administrative assistants which say "Yes, we do expect you to move to the Berkshires every summer." It's another issue as classical music tries to hire people from "non-traditional backgrounds".
posted by Hypatia at 10:59 AM on December 13, 2018 [8 favorites]


Well, this is one way you use your privilege to help those without it. Rowe is very well-off, but she's risking it (as well as her ability to get hired anywhere else) to litigate the issue of gender discrimination in pay. It won't directly help the women managers at your local big box store or fast casual chain, but it will lay groundwork to help them.

This is a good framing, thanks. This is a bit what I meant by "trickle-down effect," but I like your framing better.

I do wonder though if perhaps the groundwork is better laid in a bottom-up fashion, though; equal pay and benefits for Walmart and McDonald's employees might do more to establish a universal cultural norm that ultimately makes places like the BSO more equitable as well. Regardless, you fight the fight on the front you have access to, and I can appreciate that Rowe is tackling the issue where she is.

People who work at old-money cultural institutions are expected to perform certain lifestyles.

Believe me, I know. I'm an academic working at a university which qualifies as one of those old-money cultural institutions. We get certain perks that help to defray the cost of performing that lifestyle (travel and meal reimbursement for conferences, etc.) but it certainly doesn't cover everything. Consequently I don't perform that lifestyle all that well, and I can clearly see the ways in which that impacts me professionally.
posted by biogeo at 11:14 AM on December 13, 2018 [3 favorites]


Sadly I'm not totally surprised that even on here, there are people willing to defend the notion that women are paid less even in the face of a mountain of researched data.

Gender discrimination in (classical) music is something I've always paid attention to, mainly because I'm a female trombone player. I grew up with a LOT of people asking why I picked such an "un-feminine" instrument, people saying that girls just weren't interested in low brass (ha ha, since I am also a computer programmer I'm used to that one), noticing that low brass was dominated by men in symphonies and orchestras around the world. Fortunately I've seen the rise of female trombonists through the increased use of screens. Despite being questioned in school, I was not the only female trombonst in high school, college, and even now in a community big band jazz group. It is never a pipeline issue.

On the salary front, I never realized how underpaid I was until I worked for the federal government. I thought I was paid a decent salary, but once I realized our salaries were open to the public, I finally realized how much less some women were paid, including me. I was VERY fortunate that I had upper management that went at bat for me and bumped my salary when adjusting for some high performing teams.

The thing is, sometimes salaries are not always given with an explicit bias against woman. If a woman starts out with a lower salary than a man in the beginning, it becomes difficult to climb higher at the same rate as the comparable man. Thankfully some states like California bans asking for previous salary history. But even if they don't ask -- many women are already undervaluing themselves right out of the gate.

And to further the conversation about implicit bias, the screens may not even protect principals:

FTFA:

But most orchestras remove the screen for the final round of auditions.

“If it’s for a principal position, we’ll have them play with the whole section,” says Gary Ginst­ling, executive director of the National Symphony Orchestra in Washington.

posted by xtine at 12:42 PM on December 13, 2018 [8 favorites]


From the article:
“My personal experience is that I have not seen or found gender bias within the overscale structures that I’ve worked,” says Jonathan Martin, president of the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra, where 13 of 15 principals are men. “Where I have seen the anomalies happen, it didn’t lean toward male and female.”
One thing I'd like to point out is that in many jurisdictions, including Ohio and Masschusetts, pay discrimination on the basis of gender is a crime. So, when representatives of institutions say things like "no, there's no gender-based pay discrimination here," all they're really saying is "no, we are not guilty of the crimes we are being accused of."
posted by mhum at 12:52 PM on December 13, 2018 [4 favorites]


In my experience it's quite rare for the screen to stay up until the very very end. The Met, for example, was always considered an extreme outlier because the audition typically remains anonymous/screened until a contract is signed (eg artistic staff picks an anonymous winner; management handles the contract and reveals the winner to the artistic staff after it's done). In most places the screen comes down at some point in the finals for almost every position. That's in theory to facilitate a more standard job interview, or duets, or a full section round, and is spelled out in the orchestra's contract. Not infrequently at that point a portion of the committee then sees who's left standing, wonders how they missed "their guy" (always a guy) who they eliminated in a prior blind round, they hire nobody and try again later.
posted by range at 1:01 PM on December 13, 2018 [18 favorites]


range, that is just the dumbest thing I have heard all day. Totally understandable and totally, totally dumb. They have this whole system for unbiased interviews, and then they undermine it so that people can make sure they don't have to question their own biases—which results in nothing getting done because the biased idiots on the committee won't allow it. Lovely.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 1:11 PM on December 13, 2018 [1 favorite]


"un-feminine" instrument

When I was in the 6th grade we were invited to the junior high band room to try out instruments to get an idea what we’d want to play the following year. I picked up a trumpet and the band director said something like, “there aren’t many girls who play the trumpet.” That’s how I knew I wanted to play the trumpet.
posted by bendy at 1:14 PM on December 13, 2018 [7 favorites]


Like climate change, it is rarely possible to attribute a specific instance of pay imbalance between two people of different genders. Also like climate change, the large scale statistics make it undeniably obvious that women are in fact systematically paid less than men.
posted by wierdo at 1:24 PM on December 13, 2018 [18 favorites]


In my experience it's quite rare for the screen to stay up until the very very end.
Damnit. You mean the go-to example of how to fix hiring that we've been using in every search committee meeting for years is itself actively sabotaged in practice? It may still be far better than what we do, but that's disappointing to hear.
posted by eotvos at 2:23 PM on December 13, 2018 [4 favorites]


I wish I had the energy to make a more dynamic comment about gender discrimination in music, as a female composer, but I don't. Except to say that it's not just "classical" music: us new music bozos making weird honking sounds for a living also face an insidious wage gap, which is in many ways much harder to address head-on, since many composers' earnings are inconsistent and based so much on trends and tastes.
posted by daisystomper at 4:09 PM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


Every orchestra is different; for pro orchestras in the US it's typically a negotiated feature of the CBA. What's at least a major step forward is that the legitimate desire to see a candidate in person is generally understood by everyone involved to be in tension with a different legitimate need to not discriminate. That second aim used to be 100% ignored.

There are valid non-discriminatory reasons to want the screen down - in the wind and brass sections you're potentially hiring somebody you will be playing duets with for decades; it would be nice to know early how that goes, rather than sit next to a selfish partner for a year before you deny them tenure and start over.

And at least in orchestras that are open to listening, the steps towards making the process anonymous (not just a screen by the way, but a carpeted runway to muffle the difference between heels and loafers, etc) have made a real impact. A lot of old-school orchestra guys (again, always guys) did in fact have their eyes opened when the screens kept coming down to show them all these women they never expected would get that far. Committees that listen with their eyes are definitely still out there but it's way more fair than it used to be, and I think the process itself helps that improve over time.
posted by range at 4:22 PM on December 13, 2018 [7 favorites]


So, duet partner goes behind the screen, leaves by a different door afterward, never interacts with the judges at the audition. Am I missing something?
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 5:13 PM on December 13, 2018 [1 favorite]


At this level each player is reacting to what they see (tiny gestures, little details of how a person breathes, how and when you move your hands) as much as what they hear. It's done, I've played in auditions where it happened that way, but it's pretty unsatisfying for both parties and takes away at least half the tools of the person trying to follow. That's why there's tension -- at the same time, most people agree that as much as it can suck, blind auditions are better than the alternative.
posted by range at 6:30 PM on December 13, 2018 [3 favorites]


(I should add that the visual info is not (only) style. There's important, quantifiable data in there. Two people keeping excellent time can be pretty together. If I can see your fingers I have enough information to make our synchronization perfect and there's almost nothing you can do to lose me.)
posted by range at 6:34 PM on December 13, 2018 [1 favorite]


This happened awhile back, but relatedly... Abbie Conant and the Munich Philharmonic
posted by Kicky at 11:04 PM on December 13, 2018 [2 favorites]


« Older National Geographic 2018 Winners & More   |   Art of a water shaped planet Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments