"Working fathers get 21% 'wage bonus"

[Serpha]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36126584

Full-time working fathers out-earn their childless counterparts by more than a fifth, research suggests.
On average, fathers working full time get a 21% "wage bonus", the study based on 17,000 workers aged 42, concluded.
Fathers living in Britain with two children earned 9% more than those with just one, says the research by centre-left think tank IPPR for the TUC.

Full-time working mothers of the same age saw a "wage penalty", earning 11% less than their childless colleagues.

The report said the reasons for the "fatherhood bonus" were not clear, though they were likely to relate to hours worked, increased effort and positive discrimination.
It cited official labour market statistics showing full-time working men with dependent children worked on average half an hour longer each week than men without children.
It noted the same statistics showed that full-time working women with children worked about an hour less a week than those without children.

It also referred to a study which suggested there was a "long-term scarring effect" on the future earnings of women who initially take on part-time responsibilities when they return to work after maternity leave.
t said analysis based on fathers in the US found that increased work effort accounted for 16% of the fatherhood bonus.
The TUC said international studies cited in the report found that CVs from fathers were scored higher than identical ones from non-fathers.


So this pretty much explains the mythical "wage gap" between men and women. However I'm sure there will be some idiot feminazi, who will try to spin it around.

[Deleted]

Is it statistics or do they actually earn additional money? I don't understand, they have responsibility for their child which means they might have to take time off now and then compared to their virgin counterparts.

[poser765]

IS this really that surprising? For a LOT of people traditional gender roles are still applicable. That means the father is the primary wage earner and the mother the primary child care provider. So obviously the father will work more in order to support a growing family and the mother will miss more work in order to stay home with sick kids, etc.

[Serpha]

They earn additional money because they work longer, and no, it's not surprising. It's just that this article gives people reason why "men" (mostly the ones with kids) earn more than others. More kids = more mouths to feed = more money needed = more hours at work = more money earned.
Before feminist and other lunatics would just say "women earn less than men" without giving a reason why are they earning less (because patriarchy).

[Dhrizzle]

They earn additional money because they work longer, and no, it's not surprising. It's just that this article gives people reason why "men" (mostly the ones with kids) earn more than others. More kids = more mouths to feed = more money needed = more hours at work = more money earned.
Before feminist and other lunatics would just say "women earn less than men" without giving a reason why are they earning less (because patriarchy).

Full-time working fathers only average half-an-hour more per week for that 21% "bonus." Full-time working mothers only average an hour a week less for the 9% "penalty."

Also, "The TUC said international studies cited in the report found that CVs from fathers were scored higher than identical ones from non-fathers.

In contrast, it said, CVs from mothers were marked down against those from childless women."

[Karrotlord]

Is it statistics or do they actually earn additional money? I don't understand, they have responsibility for their child which means they might have to take time off now and then compared to their virgin counterparts.

I think it's saying that the more children men have, the longer and harder they work whereas for women it's reversed. The more children a woman has the less she works.

Maybe it's because men are assumed to have to work while the woman stays with the kids as opposed to the other way around. I could be wrong.

[Deleted]

Men have to support their family, women get the state to pay for their children.

[Wildtree]

IS this really that surprising? For a LOT of people traditional gender roles are still applicable. That means the father is the primary wage earner and the mother the primary child care provider. So obviously the father will work more in order to support a growing family and the mother will miss more work in order to stay home with sick kids, etc.

Don't you dare bringing facts into the mix here.

[Captain N]

There's also that thing where those who do not have children do not have to work as many hours to live a comfortable lifestyle as those who do have children.

[Spectral]

The report said the reasons for the "fatherhood bonus" were not clear, though they were likely to relate to hours worked, increased effort and positive discrimination.

So, the first approximation is that one can simply say, "fathers outwork everyone else". This is a real endorsement of the behavior and responsibility of fathers relative to the rest of society. We should all be glad that so many men are good men that care about taking care of their families. Bitching about them is awful.

[Deleted]

Time to start making a few babies! can't wait for my 21% wage increase!
So getting me that car I wanted but could not afford.

[Independent voter]

A lot of the executives of the big corporations in the US have stay at home wives. These stay at home moms take care of everything at home, the shopping, kids, paying the bills, the husband only has to think of work. The higher you climb the corporate ladder the more likely you will meet couples like that. They also have a very low divorce rate.

[Spectral]

A lot of the executives of the big corporations in the US have stay at home wives. These stay at home moms take care of everything at home, the shopping, kids, paying the bills, the husband only has to think of work. The higher you climb the corporate ladder the more likely you will meet couples like that. They also have a very low divorce rate.

They must be miserable though, right? Traditional gender roles are definitely awful and oppressive after all. There's no way that a couple can achieve more happiness and stability by working together and dividing labor than by being atomized individuals that can do it all on their own.

Sarcasm, hopefully, is obvious there. This shouldn't surprise anyone.

[Knolan]

People definitely need to learn the meaning of "earn".

[Karrotlord]

They must be miserable though, right? Traditional gender roles are definitely awful and oppressive after all. There's no way that a couple can achieve more happiness and stability by working together and dividing labor than by being atomized individuals that can do it all on their own.

Sarcasm, hopefully, is obvious there. This shouldn't surprise anyone.

I dunno. Everywhere I see this they are miserable but stay together for other reasons. Is that true or not? No clue. Just what I remember seeing.

[ro9ue]

They must be miserable though, right? Traditional gender roles are definitely awful and oppressive after all. There's no way that a couple can achieve more happiness and stability by working together and dividing labor than by being atomized individuals that can do it all on their own.

Sarcasm, hopefully, is obvious there. This shouldn't surprise anyone.

I think you are underestimating how comfortable most people are in those gender roles. It's not like we can just snap our fingers and erase tens of thousands of years of human social engineering and conditioning. I mean, the very make up of our human biology makes the male the worker and the female the caregiver.

It's totally cool if you want to do something else with your relationship set up, the problem comes in when 2% of the outliers tell the 98% of the population "they're doing it wrong". Just because it's not the gender role you want to do doesn't mean it doesn't work for everyone else.


Replied to your post as though sarcasm wasn't applied.

[Alydael]

The 21% "bonus" is certainly offset by all the money it takes to raise a child. I remember reading that it costs something like 600k to raise a child from birth to 18 (if you have good healthcare).

As for gender roles, did anyone stop to think that maybe traditional gender roles are a reflection of our DNA? I am not knocking anyone that goes the non traditional route, it just seems the gender roles evolved similarly in most cultures despite that many of these cultures were separated by distance, oceans, etc. You could believe it was coincidence (I guess...) or maybe most of us are just "wired" that way.

[Spectral]

Well, there's the "positive discrimination" too. Hell, I see that at work every day, mostly because I'm the only one without kids and, "But muh childrens!" is thrown around constantly as an excuse for needing more time off, more breaks, less workload, more raises, and so on.

Trust me, I feel this way too, but I don't think discrimination without any real evidence for it should be used as first approximation. I'd rather rule out potential merit-based explanations first. If, in practice, men with children work more and harder, I'd rather just acknowledge that fact than complain about the anecdotal experiences I have.

[Tijuana]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36126584

Full-time working fathers out-earn their childless counterparts by more than a fifth, research suggests.
On average, fathers working full time get a 21% "wage bonus", the study based on 17,000 workers aged 42, concluded.
Fathers living in Britain with two children earned 9% more than those with just one, says the research by centre-left think tank IPPR for the TUC.

Full-time working mothers of the same age saw a "wage penalty", earning 11% less than their childless colleagues.

The report said the reasons for the "fatherhood bonus" were not clear, though they were likely to relate to hours worked, increased effort and positive discrimination.
It cited official labour market statistics showing full-time working men with dependent children worked on average half an hour longer each week than men without children.
It noted the same statistics showed that full-time working women with children worked about an hour less a week than those without children.

It also referred to a study which suggested there was a "long-term scarring effect" on the future earnings of women who initially take on part-time responsibilities when they return to work after maternity leave.
t said analysis based on fathers in the US found that increased work effort accounted for 16% of the fatherhood bonus.
The TUC said international studies cited in the report found that CVs from fathers were scored higher than identical ones from non-fathers.


So this pretty much explains the mythical "wage gap" between men and women. However I'm sure there will be some idiot feminazi, who will try to spin it around.

It's because a man, a real man that is, works harder when he has mouths to feed.

[May90]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36126584

Full-time working fathers out-earn their childless counterparts by more than a fifth, research suggests.
On average, fathers working full time get a 21% "wage bonus", the study based on 17,000 workers aged 42, concluded.
Fathers living in Britain with two children earned 9% more than those with just one, says the research by centre-left think tank IPPR for the TUC.

Full-time working mothers of the same age saw a "wage penalty", earning 11% less than their childless colleagues.

The report said the reasons for the "fatherhood bonus" were not clear, though they were likely to relate to hours worked, increased effort and positive discrimination.
It cited official labour market statistics showing full-time working men with dependent children worked on average half an hour longer each week than men without children.
It noted the same statistics showed that full-time working women with children worked about an hour less a week than those without children.

It also referred to a study which suggested there was a "long-term scarring effect" on the future earnings of women who initially take on part-time responsibilities when they return to work after maternity leave.
t said analysis based on fathers in the US found that increased work effort accounted for 16% of the fatherhood bonus.
The TUC said international studies cited in the report found that CVs from fathers were scored higher than identical ones from non-fathers.


So this pretty much explains the mythical "wage gap" between men and women. However I'm sure there will be some idiot feminazi, who will try to spin it around.

I don't understand your conclusion. This statistics essentially explains one of the contributions to the wage gap - and yet you call it mythical. Confused much?