Most science writing today consists of cheerleading, prancing in fringed boots, waving pom poms for “science.” But one promising innovation has been the development of independent science news websites run by dissident science journalists, who sometimes write news as if science were not a religion, above human judgment. One such is American Council on Science and Health, whose point man is Alex Berezow.
There is a 7% gender-related pay gap among Uber’s drivers. How can that be? The answer, based on Uber’s wealth of data on its drivers and users may provide clues as to why gender gaps in payments occur in the professions.
The researchers found three factors accounted for the disparity, driving speed, experience, and choice of where to drive. Men drive faster than women, no surprise there and it remains equally valid for Uber drivers. The speed differential is small, about 2.2% but aggregated over all the rides it results in about 50% of the wage disparity. Prior studies of drivers, in general, suggest that men are more risk tolerant and aggressive than women; a gender-based difference that may be more innate than discriminatory.
Experience and choice of where to drive are a bit intertwined. Experience helps a driver develop a strategy of where and when to drive and which trips to accept or cancel. Experience informs how to manage the system most effectively. The data shows that more experienced drivers earn 14% more an hour. Men are more experienced because they drive more hours and are “less likely to stop driving with Uber.” Women, who had learned the same experiential lessons from equivalent experience, made the same money as their male counterparts. Choosing more lucrative routings, in part based upon experience, accounts for the remaining disparity in wages.
Men drove faster than women irrespective of experience. More.
Reality check: Shouldn’t this guy Dinerstein be driven from the field, just like that Google engineer Damore, for offering something more analytical than waving a sign above one’s pussyhat? Alternatively, the way things are going, maybe these independent science writer sites will soon outperform necrotic mainstream media science desks – in terms of the value of reading them.
See also: Postmodern media and “Who’s to blame?” It’s not just bias. Post-modern types do not attribute responsibility to anyone so blame is apportioned on the basis of presumed oppressorship vs presumed victimhood. The good news: If permanent progressive government funds all future permissible media enterprises, facts will no longer be the painful issue they have been in the past.