First of all, thanks for the background on your profession. Always fun to learn new things from insiders.

Semantically, you are correct. But I don’t see the alternative?

Agreed. My goal is to find a way to root out discrimination while still keeping a market based approach which allows for non-discriminatory variation.

I guess when I read “rewarding” I took that to mean we sat around and said, “well, X is a really good negotiator so we are going to pay him or her more.” Also, we weren’t making hiring or comp decision based on negotiating skill as a factor in a top down fashion. It was more bottoms up or organic.

That may work well in lower pay and lower level industries. Wouldn’t public record keeping that just make pay flat? Meaning, even among women, there would be very little gap between high and low performers?

You must not work in finance :^).

Not trying to troll, honest question: I understand the problem here, but what I don’t understand is the solution. How can we ensure pay is based on performance instead of sex while still providing for honest differences in experience, rapport, and negotiation ability?

And status / image implications.

What does “mall core” mean?

When I golf, there’s no such thing as a gimmie putt.

Do current Jeep’s doors not come off?

I’m sure they wouldn’t miss their TDI’s if they had the option of getting them back in a state of tune that allows them to pass emissions.

Is Battle-izing the yin to stancing’s yang?

I LOVE F50's. There. I said it.

COTD

Fond memories of my friend and I scrubbing white paint off his driveway after we made the same mod on his bugeye WRX.

Testarossa’s are certainly not ugly.

Are you talking about the chickens or the mud?

my first thought