The Girl With The Draggin' W-2 (Supplement)

Global Research, Economics & Strategy

Wells Fargo Securities’ Economics Department recently released a report entitled,

The Girl with the Draggin’ W-2, which explores the complexities of the gender pay gap. Following publication, we received many questions from interested readers.

Diane Schumaker-Krieg, Global Head of Research, Economics,  & Strategy for Wells Fargo Securities, responds to these questions below.

·What were the most surprising results of the study? Despite huge advances in technology and the ability to work remotely, the highest paying jobs continue to reward those who can work the longest and least flexible hours. Physically showing up at the office (or wherever you’re required to be) is still a prerequisite for getting ahead. And that puts primary caregivers —usually working moms —at a disadvantage.

·Why haven’t we closed the gender gap? Why has progress stalled?

Because society hasn’t fully accepted that fixing the problem for women means we also have to fix the problem for men. Both men and women need greater flexibility in their lives. Yet, it is still difficult for men to tell their employers they need time off to take their child to the doctor or to tell new acquaintances at a barbecue that they’re stay-at-home dads. Until these evolving realities are more socially accepted, the costs/burdens will fall on women. Some of the most successful women in our Research division have spouses that are full-time dads. In fact, Jodi Kantor of The New York Times wrote an insightful piece a couple of

years ago, “Wall Street Mothers, Stay-Home Fathers”that features three senior women in my department.

 

·Given that female enrollment in college is surpassing that of men, why aren’t we seeing increased pay parity?Actually we are. The wage gap would be six percent higher if women were not out-achieving men educationally.1But women are more likely than men to major in fields that pay less upon graduation —for example, education and social work versus computer science and engineering.

·Talk about the role that cultural and societal expectations play. Is part of the problem that women don’t advocate for themselves or seek out sponsors? What remains unexplained about the gender pay gap? Not advocating for oneself forcefully enough is certainly a factor. A well-known Carnegie Mellon study showed that men are four times more likely than women to ask for a raise and when women do ask, they typically request 30 percent less

than men 2.This may be rational because women are viewed more negatively for asking! Of course, if you don’t ask, the answer is always “no.”

·Another factor is women’s tolerance forrisk and failure. There are many studies showing that men will apply for a job if they meet just 60 percent of the qualifications, while women feel they need to be 100 percent qualified. This fear  of failure is a big factor holding women back.

And women tend to be over-mentored and under-sponsored. Mentors can be great sounding boards, but their influence on one’s career trajectory often ends with advice. On the other hand, sponsors tend to be senior executives who can publically advocate on behalf of their protégés and accelerate their advancement. Women are 50 percent less likely than men to have a sponsor.

3Finally, women often don’t get the benefit of honest performance feedback because male managers are reluctant to provide it, fearing an “emotional response” or risk to their own careers.

·Are there specific industries that perpetuate stereotypes and gender barriers?

I have worked on Wall Street for most of my career, and it has certainly gotten a lot better, especially on the trading floor. But overall, hard-charging occupations like investment banking, private equity, venture capital and M&A are more difficult for anyone, not just women, who need more flexibility. One of the advantages of working in Research is that while there is a great deal of travel and frequent client dinners, there is no penalty for writing a research report at your kitchen table at 3 A.M. So even within hard

-charging occupations, there are opportunities for flexibility.

·What is the economic reasoning behind closing the gender gap? Greater labor force participation —many women are now on the sidelines because after factoring in the cost of childcare (which has grown more than twice as fastas median household income

4), for many, it doesn’t pay to work. A McKinsey Global Institute study indicated that full gender equality could add 11% to 26% to global GDP by 2025 —a staggering $12 to $28trillion.

5One positive factor is women returning to the workforce and working late into their 60’s and even 70’s. Nearly 30 percent of women aged 65-69 are working (up from 15 percent in thelate 80’s).

·How can businesses benefit from closing the gender pay gap? Do you think corporations are realizing this? For businesses, closing the gender pay gap would not only attract more women but just as importantly help businesses retain the high-caliber women they already have by making it more economical for working moms to stay in the game. And of course there are countless studies showing that more diverse companies simply perform better —higher ROE, higher sales growth and stronger corporate oversight. That’s because they’re tapping into a deeper pool of talent that mirrors the diversity of their customers and discourages groupthink.

·Are there any policy solutions —either in the legislative or private sector that would help to move the needle forward? On the legislative front, I think it’s very interesting that the state of Massachusetts now makes it illegal to ask a job applicant about their prior compensation

.6This could be a huge step forward, sincewomen are generally paid less and asking for prior compensation perpetuates the wage gap.In the UK, companies with 250 or more employees must publish their gender pay gaps within the next year under a new legal requirement and will be encouraged to detail an action plan to address inequities.7In the private sector, shareholders can and should hold companies accountable. In fact, nine tech companies were asked by shareholders to study compensation and commit to closing the pay gap. Several of them publicly made commitments to do so. Amazon, Apple and Intel have reported that they’re near 100 percent pay parity.8

Required Disclosures Additional Information Available Upon Request

Wells Fargo Securities Economics Group publications are produced by Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, a U.S. broker -dealer registered with the U.S.

Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and the Securities Investor Protection Corp. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, distributes these publications directly and through subsidiaries including, but not limited to, Wells Fargo & Company, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC, Wells Fargo Securities International Limited, Wells Fargo Securities Asia Limited and Wells Fargo Securities (Japan) Co. Limited. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC. is registered with the Commodities Futures Trading Commission as a futures commission merchant and is a member in good standing of the National Futures Association. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is registered with the Commodities Futures Trading.

Commission as a swap dealer and is a member in good standing of the National Futures Association. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. are generally engaged in the trading of futures and derivative products, any of which may be discussed within this publication. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC does not compensate its research analysts based on specific investment banking transactions. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC’s research analysts receive compensation that is based upon and impacted by the overall profitability and revenue of the firm which includes, but is not limited to investment banking revenue. The information and opinions herein are for general information use only. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC does not guarantee their accuracy or completeness, nor does Wells Fargo Securities, LLC assume any liability for any loss that may result from the reliance by any person upon any such information or opinions. Such information and opinions are subject to change without notice, are for general information only and are not intended as an offer or solicitation with respect to the purchase or sales of any security or as personalized investment advice. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC is a separate legal entity and distinct from affiliated banks and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Wells Fargo & Company © 2017 Wells Fargo Securities, LLC. Important Information for Non-U.S. Recipients For recipients in the EEA, this report is distributed by Wells Fargo Securities International Limited ("WFSIL"). WFSIL is a U.K. incorporated investment firm authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

The content of this report has been approved by WFSIL a regulated person under the Act. For purposes of the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority’s rules, this report constitutes impartial investment research. WFSIL does not deal with retail clients as defined in the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive 2007. The FCA rules made under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 for the protection of retail clients will therefore not apply, nor will the Financial Services Compensation Scheme be available.

This report is not intended for, and should not be relied upon by, retail clients. This document and any other materials accompanying this document (collectively, the "Materials") are provided for general informational purposes only

.

SECURITIES: NOT FDIC-INSURED/NOT BANK-GUARANTEED/MAY LOSE VALUE