Women’s Wages Are Getting Closer to Men’s, But Not For the Right Reason

There’s been a little confusion on Twitter about the meaning of the chart I posted yesterday that compared working-class men’s and women’s hourly wages. I showed women’s wages increasing as a percentage of men’s wages, but what does that mean about actual women’s wages? To get at that you have to look at absolute dollar wages. The only non-confusing way to do this is with a separate chart for each age group, so here you go:

Keep in mind that these are hourly wages only for workers who are paid by the hour, which accounts for about half of all workers. These charts show several things clearly:

  • Men’s and women’s wages are converging. That’s the good news.
  • The bad news is that the main reason for the convergence is that men’s wages have declined. For the youngest age group, the decline of men’s wages is responsible for 100 percent of the convergence. The decline of men’s wages remains responsible for the bulk of the convergence until you get to the very oldest age group, where the increase in women’s wages is responsible for most of the convergence.
  • The absolute difference in wages widens as workers get older. As before, I assume that this is due to women being cumulatively more likely to have children as they get older.

Aside from this I don’t have any special comment to make. I just wanted to provide some of the detail behind yesterday’s chart.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend