Image 01 Image 03

Liz Warren’s Female Staffers Made Less Than Her Male Staffers in 2016

Liz Warren’s Female Staffers Made Less Than Her Male Staffers in 2016

What a surprise.

Elizabeth Warren fancies herself a champion on the issue of equal pay for women but like many progressives, she doesn’t hold herself to the same rules she wants for others.

Brent Scher of the Washington Free Beacon did a little digging and found that the pay difference between men and women on Warren’s staff is rather problematic:

Elizabeth Warren’s Female Staffers Made 71% of Male Staffers’ Salaries in 2016

The gender pay gap in Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D., Mass.) office is nearly 10 percent wider than the national average, meaning women in the Massachusetts Democrat’s office will have to wait longer than most women across the country to recognize Equal Pay Day.

Equal Pay Day, created two decades ago by the National Committee on Pay Equity, is scheduled by using the Census Bureau annual unadjusted gender pay gap to determine how far into the next year women would have to work to match annual earnings of men. Last year’s figures, showing that women earned 79.6 percent of what men earned, put Equal Pay Day on Tuesday April 4, more than three months into the calendar year.

However, women working for Warren were paid just 71 cents for every dollar paid to men during the 2016 fiscal year, according to a Washington Free Beacon analysis…

For example, Warren’s former chief of staff Mindy Myers and her male replacement Dan Geldon were not included because neither worked the full year.

Among employees employed the entire year, only one woman, Warren’s director of scheduling, earned a six-figure salary, at $100,624.88.

Five men—Warren’s director of oversight and investigations ($156,000), legislative director ($149,458), deputy chief of staff ($119,375), Massachusetts state director ($152,310), and deputy state director ($113,750)—earned more than Warren’s highest paid woman staffer in 2016.

Yesterday was “Equal Pay Day” and this is how Warren recognized it on Twitter:

How perfect.

Here’s what Elizabeth Warren said last year on “Equal Pay Day” as her female staffers were earning less money than the men on her staff:

It’s almost like Warren is just using this issue as a political club. Almost.

Hat tip to Andrew Mullins:

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


buckeyeminuteman | April 5, 2017 at 12:08 pm

I’d like to see Warren recognize her folly and in an attempt to rectify it…take back the difference in wages she paid the males to even it out. What’s the called when you take back something you had previously given out?

The Russian must hacked the payroll files.

Even though the titles are all “director”, Warren will probably attribute the pay differences to job responsibilities, experience level (overall experiences as well as at the particular job), education.

Of course, those are the criteria that all managers use to set pay levels.

The lower level staff (reception, secretary, office manager, etc) are probably all women and have less responsibilities than those in the “director” level.

    jeffweimer in reply to Liz. | April 5, 2017 at 12:53 pm

    Exactly. But she and others like her want you to only take that into consideration when *she* does it, and ignore it everywhere else.

    tom swift in reply to Liz. | April 5, 2017 at 3:54 pm

    Salaries are determined by markets … just like anything else one wants to buy. How much do you have to pay a person to slog in day after day and do the work you want done. That’s it.

    In practice it means people who are harder to replace are more expensive if their skills are in demand. A company’s head of nuclear reactor research might be very hard to replace as there are a relatively small number of people who can do the job, and they already work for your competitors. The lady who cleans the bathrooms is very easy to replace; a phone call or two and you could have another one in a matter of hours. But that doesn’t make her job less important; it’s less “valuable” because qualified people are in vastly greater supply.

Democrats only favor congruence for someone else. Merit-based responsibilities and compensation are an insurmountable obstacle to equality.

Living in Massachusetts and attempting to change our Congress critters is a frustrating experience. However, from now on when Lizzy talks about the pay discrepanciy, I fully expect her to point to herself as an employer as proof of her premise. I will probably see that when my congress critters get changed.

VaGentleman | April 5, 2017 at 8:47 pm

Red woman speak with forked tongue!

Didn’t both Romney and McCain pay their female workers far more equitable pay than Obama, all while being “hammmered” (thank you, Liz) by Obama for being against equal pay for women.

Welcome to the magical world of liberal progressive psychological projection and fantasy.