Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

<

>

Soroptimist financial literacy series begins Jan. 24

Jenkukis

Jen Kukis (Courtesy photo)

(From press release) Women and investing will be the topic of the Wednesday, Jan. 24 meeting of Soroptimist International of Davis. The free program, open to the public, will be from 11:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. in the conference room at University Inn and Suites, 1111 Richards Blvd., Davis.

Women experience a gender pay gap and have smaller pensions than men, yet they live longer. They also spend more time caring for others, which impacts their income and savings. Soroptimist International of Davis wants to empower local residents by offering a series of financial literacy talks. The programs are educational and free from sales pitches.

Jen Kukis, an Edward Jones financial adviser from Davis, will give the Jan. 24 presentation, Future programs, each led by a new financial expert, will be Feb. 28, April 24 and May 29.

With five money questions, Kukis will help attendees identify their financial goals and set strategies. Participants will be given tools to assess their financial positions, establish objectives, and begin formulating plans on ways to get there while staying on track.

Lunch is provided by the club, with donations accepted to cover costs. First-time guests are always free.

Soroptimist is a global volunteer organization that provides women and girls with access to the education and training they need to achieve economic empowerment. It was founded in 1921 in Alameda County. Soroptimist International of Davis was chartered in 1954. Local members join some 75,000 Soroptimists in 122 countries and territories to contribute time and financial support to community-based projects benefiting women and girls. Its core values are gender equality, empowerment, education, diversity and fellowship.

SI Davis offers cash Live Your Dream Awards to female heads of household seeking education or training, and assists King High students through its Dream It, Be It: Career Support for Girls program. It also funds high school scholarships, and grants to nonprofits that align with the Soroptimist mission.

SI Davis members meet twice a month on Wednesdays – once at lunchtime and once in the evening – and connect for other fun activities and service. Learn more at https://www.sidavis.org/.

Posted by

davisite2

on

in

, ,
Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

23 responses to “Soroptimist financial literacy series begins Jan. 24”

  1. South of Davis

    I’m a big fan of “financial literacy” and see a lot of problems related to the increasing number of people that are “financially illiterate” so I hope the series is a success.
    I also hope that Jen makes it clear that “Women experience a gender pay gap and have smaller pensions than men” ONLY if they take lower paying jobs.
    A female engineering professor at UCD will not make less or have a smaller pension than a male engineering professor hired for the same job on the same day.
    Google found that last year 57.7% bachelor’s degrees went to women vs. just 42.3% to men and the 25 year old female CPA does not make more than a 25 year old male janitor because of “gender pay gap” is is because she picked a higher paying job.

    Reply
  2. Roberta L. Millstein

    SOD writes: A female engineering professor at UCD will not make less or have a smaller pension than a male engineering professor hired for the same job on the same day.
    What is your evidence for this claim? It is not true in my experience. Salaries are negotiable and negotiated. A bunch of years back, UC Davis did an equity review and quite a number of women had their salaries increased — I was one of them. My salary was quite a bit lower than others at my stage. I guess you could blame me and say I didn’t negotiate hard enough or whatever, but… well, I won’t go down that path. Let’s just say that there are a lot of documented disparities in salaries, not just by gender but also by race.

    Reply
  3. Roberta L. Millstein

    I just looked at my records. I actually received four salary equity increases, in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. Note this was just to get my salary closer to the average and did not include back pay for the years of lower salaries (I started at UCD in 2006). So yeah.
    It wasn’t a program that only included women, but it was largely women who were helped by it.

    Reply
  4. Ron O

    There’s a dearth of men at universities, these days. Perhaps this is partly due to more men (than women) going into the trades.
    I would suspect that the biggest reason for any residual “pay gap” (at large) may be due to more women interrupting their careers to act as caregivers for their own children (and possibly their parents), compared to men.
    I believe it’s illegal to pay someone a different amount based upon their sex.

    Reply
  5. Roberta L. Millstein

    Well, I didn’t have any children, and in fact, a lot of academic women don’t have children (I venture to say that a higher percentage of women in academia don’t have children as compared to women “at large”).
    It is illegal to do it, hard to prove it — and yet you can bet that fear of lawsuits was part of why the University of California did the equity increases.

    Reply
  6. Alan C. Miller

    I wouldn’t do well in this group. Not only am I male, but I’m more of a Sore Pessimist.

    Reply
  7. Roberta L. Millstein

    I’m a Sore Realist myself.
    (ba dump bump)

    Reply
  8. Ron O

    Well, I didn’t have any children, and in fact, a lot of academic women don’t have children (I venture to say that a higher percentage of women in academia don’t have children as compared to women “at large”)
    Well, as you said to SOD, I guess you’d probably need to provide evidence of how many women in academia have kids, what the percentage pay difference is between them and men with similar levels of experience, etc.
    Though it sounds like the “equity” program did look at that, and partly made up for it (under threat of a lawsuit, as you noted). Though I suppose we’d need to know exactly how they made determinations if one were to conclude that there was discrimination (which could be intentional or unintentional).
    Perhaps there’s other reasons, as well. (Ingrained cultural expectations, even self-inflicted ones.)
    But if we’re going to talk about anecdotal experiences, most of my managers have been women – making far more than I did. At my last job, the upper-level manager for the entire region was a woman about my age, earning far more than many men in the same organization with far more experience.
    Honestly, I suspect that women tend to favor “their own” at times, just like any other group. It’s partly human nature, unfortunately.

    Reply
  9. Ron O

    (Forgot to indicate that my first paragraph was a quote. Probably because men don’t do as well in English.)
    Bada-bing, bada-boom.

    Reply
  10. Roberta L. Millstein

    Ron, considering you started by saying “I suspect,” I’m not exactly going to go out of my way to provide evidence to counter what you “suspect.”
    The equity program just looked at the numbers, period, and raised salaries accordingly. I don’t know that there was a specific lawsuit threat, but when there are large numbers of inequities, yeah, the higher ups get nervous.
    You keep offering other explanations. Are you saying that discrimination is not a plausible explanation for the difference?

    Reply
  11. Ron O

    You keep offering other explanations. Are you saying that discrimination is not a plausible explanation for the difference?
    No – I don’t think you read my response that carefully, if that’s what you conclude.
    But had it gone to trial, perhaps other reasons would be put forth as well. Don’t know. As you noted, discrimination is difficult to prove.
    Age discrimination is a huge factor in the job market, as well.
    But here’s some more anecdotal experience, if you’re interested. In addition to my last job, the one before that was also headed up by a female regional manager. I never even met her, as she was in a different office. The local “field” organization (consisting of maybe 25 employees, and a like number of contractors) was also headed up by a woman. That woman was replaced with another woman, when she retired. I believe there were more men in that organization overall.
    At a job previous to that one, the head of that department was (I believe) a transexual. (That is, someone who was previously a biological male, but underwent surgery to change this.) My immediate boss under her was male.
    Articles I’ve read suggest that universities are increasingly concerned about a dearth of male students. At times, I also read that males are increasingly not working (compared to females). I can probably find those articles, if you’d like.
    Again, discrimination (whether intentional or unintentional) is a human trait. I can provide many examples of this. (For example, there were previous complaints that the gay male community was not very welcoming of people of color, women, etc.) But when the AIDS crisis hit, it was reported that females in the community (lesbians, mostly) often became the caregivers. (Just basing this on memory, but it is interesting that traditional roles don’t always change.)
    There are also women who don’t accept trans women as such. (Though I’m not sure if that counts as “discrimination”.)
    I believe that what I’m referring to is similar to critical race theory. That is, the dominant population tends to have power.
    And there are fields in which women dominate. (Increasingly, I suspect that universities are one such place.)

    Reply
  12. Roberta L. Millstein

    I said: “You keep offering other explanations. Are you saying that discrimination is not a plausible explanation for the difference?”
    To which Ron responded, “No – I don’t think you read my response that carefully, if that’s what you conclude.”
    Ok, so you do think discrimination against women is a plausible explanation for the statistical difference in pay between men and women. I am glad to hear it.
    As for universities, I looked up the UCs. Acceptance is about 60-40, women to men. So are applications. Someone should figure out why more men aren’t applying to college, but the issue isn’t discrimination in admissions.

    Reply
  13. Ron O

    And there are fields in which women dominate. (Increasingly, I suspect that universities are one such place.)
    That was just a guess, but given that there’s hard evidence that fewer men are going to college (compared to women), this is well on the path to change. (An advanced degree is required to be a professor.)
    American colleges and universities now enroll roughly six women for every four men. This is the largest female-male gender gap in the history of higher education, and it’s getting wider. Last year, U.S. colleges enrolled 1.5 million fewer students than five years ago, The Wall Street Journal recently reported. Men accounted for more than 70 percent of the decline.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/young-men-college-decline-gender-gap-higher-education/620066/

    Reply
  14. Ron O

    Ok, so you do think discrimination against women is a plausible explanation for the statistical difference in pay between men and women. I am glad to hear it.
    I think it’s one factor. Perhaps not the largest factor.
    I’d go back to my original comment (regarding the entire labor market, not just college professors) regarding another probable factor (which was noted in the press release above). That is, women tend to interrupt their careers to provide care for others, more than men.
    And although some don’t like to talk about it, there may actually be biological differences accounting for different skill sets (on average). At least, that’s what I was told. (In my own case, I believe that my inherent skills do not necessarily correspond with that.)
    For sure, there are differences in physical strength, which are a factor in some jobs.

    Reply
  15. Roberta L. Millstein

    Well, there it is.

    Reply
  16. Ron O

    Well, there it is.
    There “what” is? Inquiring minds would like to know. I’m not closed-off to exploring that (nor do I feel defensive at all).

    Reply
  17. Roberta L. Millstein

    There are your views.

    Reply
  18. Ron O

    Oh, o.k.
    Regarding biological “brain” differences, I personally/anecdotally haven’t found observed that to be the case regarding skill sets. At least, not in regard to the individuals of both sexes I’ve known.
    Though I thought I’d briefly see if I can find anything, and found this:
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-women-really-better-with-language/#:~:text=Researchers%20report%20in%20the%20journal,encoding%2C%20which%20decipher%20information%20abstractly.
    If there is a difference, it’s probably overshadowed by differences between school systems in different countries (e.g., Asian school systems, vs. American school systems).
    Then again, I’m now (also) told that there’s differences between “male” and “female” brains regarding self-perceived gender.

    Reply
  19. South of Davis

    I’m wondering if Roberta is aware that California Equal Pay Act makes it “illegal” for an employer from paying its employees less than employees of the opposite sex for equal work?
    I’m not saying that it didn’t happen in the past, but I’m betting that Roberta can’t name a single job in Davis where people hired at the same time to do the exact same task where a man is paid more money than a woman.
    P.S. To Roberta you seem OK that UC admits less men since less apply, do you think UC should also reduce the number of students of color based on their percentage of total applicants?

    Reply
  20. Roberta L. Millstein

    Passed in 2017, yes. But do you think there is someone going around checking every place of employment to make sure everything is equitable? No, there is not. In many cases, people don’t even know the salaries of their colleagues. And if they do know, many do not have the time, money (see?), or knowhow to get a lawyer to press their case, legal cases also being time consuming, expensive, and emotionally draining. It’s a good and necessary law, but it’s going to be relatively wealthy and educated people who benefit from it — like UC employees. These are not the people who the Soroptimists are looking to assist.
    I am not “OK” with a lower percentage of men applying to the UC. I stated: “Someone should figure out why more men aren’t applying to college, but the issue isn’t discrimination in admissions.”
    Here are some tables for you:
    UC applications by race: https://www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/_files/factsheets/2023/table-2.1-california-freshman-applications-by-campus-and-race-ethnicity.pdf
    https://www.ucop.edu/institutional-research-academic-planning/_files/factsheets/2023/table-2.1-california-freshman-applications-by-campus-and-race-ethnicity.pdf
    Have fun comparing all the UCs; you can report back. I just looked at the applicant/admissions for UCD for 2023 and the percentages are pretty close.

    Reply
  21. South of Davis

    Roberta says:

    I am not “OK” with a lower percentage of men applying to the UC
    I am fine with less men “applying” to UC schools (I don’t want to force anyone to apply to UC), I just have a problem with UC schools (and all other “public” schools) not having an objective system for letting people in so they make it easier for people they want more of in the schools to get in and harder for people they want less of in the schools to get in (I don’t have any problem with “private” schools letting in anyone they want or letting in guys that can’t read but are good at kicking a football).
    P.S. Years ago when I was an undergrad I was talking with a super successful businessman (dozens of business and pushing $100 million net worth) when a female classmate mentioned the (often quoted) “women only earn 2/3 of when man earn” and he asked the woman “If that were true why world any business hire men if they could cut their payroll by 1/3 and make more money hiring all women”?
    P.P.S. If a woman in Davis opened a garden supply store on 5th street and sold plants for less than the Don at the Redwood Barn what percentage of men do you think would pay more to buy from Don because he is a man? (my guess is WAY less than 1%)…

    Reply
  22. Roberta L. Millstein

    I am fine with less men “applying” to UC schools (I don’t want to force anyone to apply to UC)
    Of course literally no one is talking about forcing anyone to apply to the UC. But I do think it would be good to know the reasons why, and then decide from there whether it’s something to try to fix (for example, if it is based on misunderstandings, then we could seek to correct those misunderstandings).
    I just have a problem with UC schools (and all other “public” schools) not having an objective system for letting people in so they make it easier for people they want more of in the schools to get in and harder for people they want less of in the schools to get in (I don’t have any problem with “private” schools letting in anyone they want or letting in guys that can’t read but are good at kicking a football).
    Since you seem very interested in the legality of this sort of thing, I’m sure you’re aware that race-based admissions were made illegal in CA by Prop 209, and recently, affirmative action became illegal nationwide via the Supreme Court’s ruling on Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. (SFFA) v. President & Fellows of Harvard College (Harvard) and SFFA v. University of North Carolina (UNC).
    “If that were true why world any business hire men if they could cut their payroll by 1/3 and make more money hiring all women”?
    The woman-dominated professions have historically also paid less: K-12 teaching, nursing, childcare, housecleaning.
    sold plants for less than the Don at the Redwood Barn
    You assume that the business could stay afloat doing that.

    Reply
  23. Ron O

    “As for universities, I looked up the UCs. Acceptance is about 60-40, women to men. So are applications. Someone should figure out why more men aren’t applying to college, but the issue isn’t discrimination in admissions.”
    Technically, I believe that there could be discrimination in the admissions process if one group is not applying at the same level as other groups (e.g., in comparison to their percentage of the population at large).
    I have read that enrollment has dropped among white males in particular.
    Not sure how this would manifest itself; but perhaps in regard to “recruiting” efforts which result in disproportionate applications.
    My noting of this should not be construed as “concern” regarding a dearth of white males (in comparison to their overall population). But based upon my understanding of the law, processes which contribute to disproportionate applications could be found to be discriminatory.
    Perhaps a more blatant example of this type of potential discrimination is the “Davis-connected buyer’s program” at WDAAC. Which, although it wasn’t designed to do so, would have likely resulted in “disproportionate applications” (and “qualifications”, in that case).

    Reply

Leave a comment