I'll start raising my eyebrows once they show me statistics that show the pay discrepancy adjusted for job level.
That's a fair expectation.
On the low end of the pay scale (low $40's) are positions like "Analyst," "Assistants," "Coordinators," and "Researchers." There's even a position called "Vetter" that pays $45k.
The positions increase from there.
In lieu of your skepticism, I wondered if the staff positions didn't include a heavier weighting of lower wage positions like secretaries, housekeepers, janitors, etc. - but they all appear to be professional positions ('cept maybe for the "Vetter" - not a clue what skills or education is required for that
).
I downloaded the report in Excel and analyzed those employees making $100,000 or more (figuring those salaries would best represent the article's main point, that Obama's staff is disproportionately staffed by men):
There are 21 employees in the highest pay grade - $172k
7 are women (33.3%), 14 are men (66.6%) - - 33% fewer women
There are 65 employees in the $130k - $163.5k pay grade
26 are women (40%), 39 are men (60%) - - 21% fewer women
There are 55 employees in the $100k - $129.7k pay grade
21 are women (38%), 34 are men (62%) - - 28% fewer women
All told, there are 141 employees making $100,000 or more
54 are women (38.3%), 87 are men (61.7%) - - 23.4% fewer women
There are an additional 310 employees making salaries from $41k to $99k, but I didn't bother with those since they are likely "less close" to Obama than those positions above - valid or not, it bears pointing out that the article's point is that overall, Obama's staff has 18% fewer women, however that number is actually skewed when you look at the upper third of his staff (pay-wise) has 23.4% fewer women at the top.
Bottom line, I think it's a valid criticism.
