COVID-19 INFORMATION What you need to know about the coronavirus if you are living in Japan or planning a visit.
business

Female sales reps in U.S. say Daiichi Sankyo discriminates

41 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

41 Comments
Login to comment

Good luck ladies! Every chip at these practices counts towards bringing them down.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

Shocking, simply shocking. Imagine if you can a Japanese firm discriminating against females.

7 ( +11 / -4 )

I am backing the ladies on this one!

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I work all night, I work all day, to pay the bills I have to pay

And still there never seems to be a single penny left for me

That's too bad

In my dreams I have a plan

If I got me a wealthy man

I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd fool around and have a ball

Money, money, money

Must be funny

In the rich man's world

Money, money, money

Always sunny

In the rich man's world

Aha-ahaaa........

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

It is hugh time J Corporations fall in line with GENDER EQUITY policies - systemically - from equal pay to equal opportunity...............................Japan will continue to be considered living in the EDO period with regard to women 's issues , unless it addresses this significant HUMAN RIGHTS issue.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

How can anybody hope to win such cases are treated with apathy?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

It is hugh time J Corporations fall in line with GENDER EQUITY policies - systemically - from equal pay to equal opportunity...............................Japan will continue to be considered living in the EDO period with regard to women 's issues , unless it addresses this significant HUMAN RIGHTS issue.

you know that women's earnings in America are just 77% compared to males right? this is a global problem and America and the West need to change too.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Its is shame that Lady rights are still not solved ..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You got to be careful with these alligations. Some time you just find it is just petty rivally between sales reps finding the top sales rep within another sales district to be a female.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

How can anybody hope to win such cases are treated with apathy?

Not in the US they arent. Daiichi Sankyo are abou to learn they cant get away with the same sh1t there that they get away with here. Good luck ladies.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

In other words, they are treated the way women are in Japan. My wife experienced it as a sales woman and have met dozens and dozens of others in similar situations. So few women are able to meaningfully rejoin the workforce it is an incredible waste. In a country with zero population growth and a increasingly greying population you`d think there would be a strong emphasis on gender equality in the workforce here. Everyone in charge in the govt, industry and education is a balding (with either a barcode or toupe) oyaji.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

ultradork: Sorry, not following what zero growth and a greying population have to do with gender equality in the workforce.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

this is another ridiculous example of lawyers and greedy clients trying to use the justice system in the US which is very corrupt to harrass foreign companies. I am sure the courts will throw this one out. and they should. Each company has every right to decide its own practices....and women are NOT the equals to men in every way and vice versa. Any rational person knows that and the ultra liberal agenda to level all the genders is just silly.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I am glad these women are fighting. Pay gaps between genders is a huge issue all over the world and Japan, as we know, it so far behind it isn't even funny. I'm wondering if these women are Japanese or American, if the bosses are Japanese or American and just how large are the gaps? Until Japan gets rid of the 1.3 salary cap for "spouses" (aka wives) Japanese women will NEVER get equal pay and promotion chances. Thing is, many women here don't want the changes so... it isn't just the men that need a reality check.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

For anybody saying that women make 77c for every man's dollar, I would suggest you look at the 1963 Wage Equality Act in America. It is a federal law that guarantees women make the same as men for the same work. If women were cheaper to hire, businesses wouldn't hire men.

Most damning to the lie trotted out by the feminist movement is the very comprehensive study by the Department of Labor that concluded unequivocally that income disparities between men and women consisted almost entirely of career choices. Women chose more flexible jobs to be able to spend more time with family and worked less, while men chose jobs that kept them away from family for longer. The figure that women earn less is not for the same work, it is an average based on hours worked regardless of the field worked in.

In fact, when single working women are compared with single working men, they out earn them by a small amount.

Women have obstacles, and so do men, but the income disparity chestnut has been laid to rest. It is a card that should be taken out of every feminist's deck.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

For anybody saying that women make 77c for every man's dollar, I would suggest you look at the 1963 Wage Equality Act in America. It is a federal law that guarantees women make the same as men for the same work. If women were cheaper to hire, businesses wouldn't hire men.

If you think women in the same job with the same titles with the same experience get the same pay, you;re mistaken. Stats are released every year about this.

Care to link that stat you state that single working women make more than single men?

The "card" has NOT been laid to rest at all. If so, a link to the article that says so - with the research to back it up.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

And before you argue... http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/08/four-decades-on-equal-pay-yet-to-come

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

I read your link. They admittedly cannot show that this comes from a disparate wage for the same working time/seniority for the same positions:

Experts said it was not possible to extrapolate to what extent men earn more than women for exactly the same job, and how much was down to the fact that men typically hold more senior positions within a given category. However, it is clear that both play a role, they said.

I assume you at least read the summary of the PDF I mentioned by the Department of Labor where they exhaustively prove that you cannot take averages as an indication of disparity in pay for the same work. At least look up the sea of research on the matter by googling "pay gap myth".

Here is a random article about women making more than men: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

Women still have things to complain about, but research is proving that many feminist numbers have been massaged and manipulated for political reasons for decades. You should take comfort in the fact that most people are simply overjoyed that women are graduating university at higher rates than men, surpassing men in management numbers, and yet there are still aggressive hiring, promotion, and enrollment practices based on the assumption that women are still the underdogs of the 60's. After all, if feminism were about equality, women would be demanding to be part of that exclusive group who die on the job (95% men).

1 ( +2 / -1 )

sleepy dog,

"women are graduating university at higher rates than men"

Yes, they are. And this speaks more to women taking greater advantage of educational opportunities that didn't previously exist. As of Feb. 2012, the ratio of women to men enrolled in college stood at 56.4-43.6 and data shows that the reason may come down to simply this: Women seem to be not only better recognizing the benefits of possessing a college education, but also are actually doing something about it. Men, according to Bureau of Labor statistics, well . . . aren't.

"surpassing men in management numbers"

No, they aren't. Right now, women occupy approximately 40% of all managerial positions in the United States, according to the Bureau of Labor.

Besides, bringing up management positions might not be the best course for your argument here, since reams of data indicate this particular segment of emloyment is where women consistently make 81 cents on the dollar for doing exactly the same work as their male counterparts, despite being single and without children, i.e., without those "hindrances" to productivity that some posters here would have us believe are "really" at work towards explaining the wage gap.

"if feminism were about equality, women would be demanding to be part of that exclusive group who die on the job (95% men).

They have been, or haven't you been paying attention? Women have been struggling for years to be allowed to partake in combat roles in the U.S. military. That desire has only this year seen progress.

Women also make up a significant number of the hundreds of thousands of police officers and fighter fighters who protect the public across the country.

In 1983 when the statistics were first collected, female firefighters made up 1% (1,700) of the 170,000 professional firefighters in the U.S. In 2006, this number rose to 4.5% (13,700) of the 305,000 professionals out there. Mind you, these numbers reflect only career firefighters, and exclude administrators, managers and volunteer firefighters.

According to the Bureau of Justice, in 1987, 1 in 13 police officers was female. In 2007, that number rose to 1 in 8.

In 2009, women made up some 22% of the total number of laborers (not administrative, management, or sales) in the constructions industry, and all indicators were that this number was expected to rise in the face of anticipated annual shortages of some 250,000 laborers, for lack of . . . wait for it . . . male applicants.

So your efforts to imply that women are too scared to do dangerous jobs rings more than a little hollow.

"and yet there are still aggressive hiring, promotion, and enrollment practices based on the assumption that women are still the underdogs of the 60's."

Interestingly, the very article you cite does little to support this assertion, as the rise in income for certain segments of female workers is attributed not to aggressive efforts to hire and promote, but rather to "a growing knowledge-based economy, the decline of a manufacturing base and an increasing minority population" coupled with ""This generation [of women adapting] to the fundamental restructuring of the American economy better than their older predecessors or male peers..."

It would seem, by most indicators, that the issue for men here is not that women are being given an unfair advantage, but rather that men have for some inexplicable reason decided to stop working as hard as previous generations towards success.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Each company has every right to decide its own practice

Only within the boundaries of the laws of the country in which they are operating, although your mistake is understandable when you look at the behaviour of certain organizations in recent years.

Agreed men and women cannot be considered equal in all things but in a sales role - absolutely they should. It generally takes neither brawn nor boobs to sell pharmaceuticals. Generally speaking.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

LFRAgain

I just want to make sure I understand:

-Men don't work as hard as women, generally. (lazy men/productive women)

-Women are entering post-secondary at greater rates because they simply are more able to recognize that university offers upward mobility than men are. (stupid men)

-Women would gladly make up 50% of the dangerous jobs that kill mostly men nowadays, but they are stymied by men. (oppressive men)

-Women managers do the same work as men but get paid 81cents to a man's dollar. (oppressed women)

-Having children is not a real hindrance to productivity. Only in the (implied) eyes of men. (oppressive men)

Well, it's good to see that women are being recognized as being simultaneously oppressed and better than men. They seem to be more robust and admirable than their male counterparts. I do wonder how it is possible though, that women fail due to men's oppression but succeed due to their own tenacity, while men fail due to their own inadequacy, and succeed due to an implied patriarchy. After all, if men are really pulling all the strings, how did we allow women to get where they are now? There's been a lot of ground given.

Anyway, it's the same old story. The number of safety nets and services for women greatly outnumber those for men. Society cares more about women, in general, from DV to rape to GM to criminal sentencing to parental rights. I think we're looking at a future where we'll have 65% women in university classes and we'll still be labouring under the mantra that that's unfair for women. And maybe it is considering how much better they evidently are.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

It generally takes neither brawn nor boobs to sell pharmaceuticals. Generally speaking.

I think boobs work. Coming from sales experience, hahaha.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

sleepy dog,

"I just want to make sure I understand:"

"Men don't work as hard as women, generally. (lazy men/productive women)"

No, that's not what I said at all. I said that research shows a trend of fewer men seeing a post-secondary education as worthwhile than in previous generations. If you want to interpret that as a blanket indictment of all men, you're more than welcome to. But you'd be overstretching to say the least.

"Women are entering post-secondary at greater rates because they simply are more able to recognize that university offers upward mobility than men are. (stupid men)

No, I stated that one factor revealed is that more women are seeking out a post-secondary education than men. Among current high school seniors, some 60% of female students researched colleges before graduation. The boys? a paltry 36%. You can't blame that lack of impetus among the boys on Affirmative Action.

"Women would gladly make up 50% of the dangerous jobs that kill mostly men nowadays, but they are stymied by men. (oppressive men)"

Now you're just being silly. Never said that at all. I stated that women can and do seek out dangerous jobs. You asserted that they don't. You were wrong. Accept it.

"Women managers do the same work as men but get paid 81cents to a man's dollar. (oppressed women)"

Yes, they do the same work and make 81 cents on the dollar compared to their male counterparts. You understand this perfectly. As to your statement about oppression, are you stating that this point of fact is indeed oppression, or that this point of fact, while unfortunate for women, isn't oppression in any sense?

"Having children is not a real hindrance to productivity. Only in the (implied) eyes of men. (oppressive men)"

And the silliness continues. The sites you and other posters have provided to "debunk the myth" of the wage gap suggest that women earn less than their male counterparts because they simply have different priorities and that they choose to devote more time to family, leading to a natural decline in addition income generation that comes from working overtime, weekends, et cetera. I pointed out that women who have neither families nor children and do the exact same work as their professional counterparts still make less than men for no explainable reason. If you want to attribute this to oppressive men, again, that's certainly your right.

"Well, it's good to see that women are being recognized as being simultaneously oppressed and better than men."

Coy doesn't suit you or this discussion. Women aren't being hailed as better than men. Rather, data indicates they are taking advantage of better employment opportunities that didn't exist in previous generations. And that despite making inroads into occupations previously dominated by men, still see a limit to earning potential that, when all other factors are eliminated, seems to be determined by gender.

"After all, if men are really pulling all the strings, how did we allow women to get where they are now."

We live in a democracy. Because of the efforts of determined women, as well as a growing number of men who reject outdated gender role models, things have changed. And it's a change that has occurred gradually. You try to make it sound like it happened overnight. It didn't. And it's still no where it needs to be.

"Society cares more about women, in general, from DV to rape to GM to criminal sentencing to parental rights."

And this is the point where our discussion comes to an end. I don't particularly relish the thought of beating my head against the proverbial wall with someone who sums up his position with, "Oh, woe is us, the poor disliked men of the world." Anyone operating from this basic assumption is unlikely to have his mind changed by any amount of facts, figures, data, or rationale. Good luck with that horrific chip you're hefting.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Excellent post LFRA!!!

Keep trying sleepy. The fact that women are more educated than men these days in the west speaks volumes. We KNOW we have to be if we want to be given a chance at a decent career. Men? Many assume they'll get the job because the women won't be as smart/qualified/willing to work the hours. Times are changing but not fast enough.

You also might want to think about why women are the ones who stay home with their kids or work flex/less hours. Have dawn on you because they are the ones expected to? Yep, support hubbies career even if they are more qualified and better educated... I know MANY women like this. Why? Because in the long run, the MEN get paid more and are given more opportunities.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

You also might want to think about why women are the ones who stay home with their kids or work flex/less hours. Have dawn on you because they are the ones expected to? Yep, support hubbies career even if they are more qualified and better educated... I know MANY women like this. Why? Because in the long run, the MEN get paid more and are given more opportunities.

Maybe it's because most women like looking after their children, and men on the whole neither like it nor are very good at it. (Yes, I know there are exceptions).

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Cleo, you can think that but I know many who are bitter that they are the ones expected to stay home and give up their career.

So your sexist comments are okay to make? Frankly, I know many, many men who seem to be much better than their self intelligent wife who only sees their kids as a meal ticket. No doubt that my husband would be the better care giver but it is an expectation of society that I am. It's sexist and BS. Most females can give birth, not all are goods mothers.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@sleepy dog,

Here is a random article about women making more than men: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

And here is a quote from that very same article:

Here's the slightly deflating caveat: this reverse gender gap, as it's known, applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities. The rest of working women — even those of the same age, but who are married or don't live in a major metropolitan area — are still on the less scenic side of the wage divide.

That is an awful SMALL sampling of women that the article is crowing about. The vast majority are still striving to match their male counterparts.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I know many who are bitter that they are the ones expected to stay home and give up their career.

If they don't want kids they don't need to have them. Problem solved, Nothing to be bitter about.

So your sexist comments are okay to make?

Sexist smexist. We're homo sapiens, not sticklebacks. Maybe the bitterness comes from ignoring your hormones.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Many aren't having kids which is why Japan is having a population issue. Women ARE refusing to have kids because they don't want to stay home. Plenty of problems here because of it.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

All readers back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo,

I rabsolutely respect and appreciate your contributions here, but yourparticular take on the role of women (and men) in modern society is anything but.

Hormones also dictate that men bash in the brains of potential suitors and illegitimate children. Would you have us revert back to that?

"Maybe it's because most women like looking after their children, and men on the whole neither like it nor are very good at it. (Yes, I know there are exceptions)."

Your allowance for exceptions isn't nearly as emcompassing as it needs to be. As tmarie points out accurately, possessing a uterus does not automatically qualify one to be a mother. Just as being able to provide semen does not automatically a father make.

And the suggestion that men "on the whole" neither like nor are very good at child rearing belies a . . . how shall I put this? . . . limited understanding on your part of what makes men tick.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hormones also dictate that men bash in the brains of potential suitors and illegitimate children.

tmarie confuses us with sticklebacks, you confuse us with lions.

Your allowance for exceptions isn't nearly as emcompassing as it needs to be.

I say it as I see it. Of all the fathers I've known, only a handful have been really adept at the whole looking after kids thing (as opposed to the taking them out to the park/beach to get them out of Mum's hair for an afternoon thing), and the majority of those have been relieved to hand the reins back to Mum at the end of their shift. I'm not saying no man is good at/likes looking after kids, just that there are not many of that ilk, certainly not as many as there are women who slip naturally into the role of mother and consider it more important than a 'career'.

Neither am I saying that women should take this role, or men should take that role: people can and should do what works for them. What I am saying is that I disagree with tmarie and her claim that most women who remain childless do so because they are 'bitter that they are the ones expected to stay home'.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

What I am saying is that I disagree with tmarie and her claim that most women who remain childless do so because they are 'bitter that they are the ones expected to stay home'.

Care to post where I said that?

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Care to post where I said that?

FEB. 14, 2013 - 01:32AM JST - I know many who are bitter that they are the ones expected to stay home and give up their career.

11:19AM JST - Women ARE refusing to have kids because they don't want to stay home.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Cleo,

Not to be a stickler (but I'm going to be just that), but Tmarie said, "many," and not "most," as you claimed. There's a difference, I think you would agree, and one that you respected when you used highly generalized statements like "most" and "on the whole" to illustrate your points.

I understand in principle what you're saying, but I don't agree with it, and that's me calling it as I see it. Of all the fathers I know, significantly more men from my generation and younger generations are more adept at child-rearing (and no, not just taking the kids to the park to get them out of mom's hair for the afternoon) than, say, those from my father's generation.

Times change, and with them the types of expectations and requirements society places on us. In the climate of the 50s and 60s, it's no surprise that most men stayed away from child-rearing and most women embraced it. It was expected of them. The idea of a woman going out to find a career was practically unheard of, and to even suggest that a man could be, of all things, a house husband, why, you'd likely be laughed out of the room for even thinking such a preposterous thing.

But the reality is that with changing mores and values, men and women are freer to explore avenues in life that they up until now were discouraged from pursuing for no better reasons than tradition and an unwillingness to rock a boat that was helmed largely by men. With that freedom has come a gradual change in tradition perceptions of which gender is more adept at what.

More men now embrace the idea of staying home to raise their children because society has toned down the message that they can't and shouldn't do it. More women are leaving the home to seek fullfilling careers because society has toned down the message that to want such a thing is unnatural. And they're pretty good at what they do, once they've sloughed off the staid and tired stereotypes that have kept them from exploring their full potential as human beings.

As homo sapiens, we are most definitely more than the sum of our DNA and those primitive instincts etched thereupon, and we prove that time and time again.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Tmarie said, "many," and not "most,"

And then she went on to say Women ARE refusing to have kids, with no qualifiers. Pretty sweeping statement.

As for the rest of your post, I agree with it more or less completely. Women (and men) are free to do what they want to do. That's great. My take, from what I see around me, is that most women still want to raise their own children, and if they can't, choose not to have them in the first place - they see no point in working and paying someone else to have all the fun. Ditto most men, while more adept at childcare than their own fathers, still want to be essentially breadwinners, and work hard at it. I see no reason for anyone to be bitter as tmarie claims.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Tmarie said, "many," and not "most,"

And then she went on to say Women ARE refusing to have kids, with no qualifiers. Pretty sweeping statement.

As for the rest of your post, I agree with it more or less completely. Women (and men) are free to do what they want to do. That's great. My take, from what I see around me, is that most women still want to raise their own children, and if they can't, choose not to have them in the first place - they see no point in working and paying someone else to have all the fun. Ditto most men, while more adept than their own fathers, still want to be breadwinners, and work hard at it. I see no reason for anyone to be bitter as tmarie claims.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Readers, please stop bickering. Focus your comments on what is in the story and not at or about each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo, that's npot what I said - as already pointed out. Better luck next time.

Round and round we go. I think Japanese females are making their point loud and clear with regards to not having kids. Shame that some folks don't listen and don't get it.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

they see no point in working and paying someone else to have all the fun.

I think the very long lists at daycare disagree with this. Cleo, you're got grown children, no? Just exactly how many young women of child rearing age are you in contract with and actually close with? I'd being willing to wager not near as many as I am which could be why you seem to be a bit behind on what women here in their 2-30s are thinking, feelings and wanting in life. A life of being "nothing more" than a housewife doesn't appeal to MANY - not most, hope that's clear for you.

Women are fighting for childcare (seen be wait-lists in pretty much any large city here), fair wages and better working hours because many would like to have a career - and perhaps a family. Some folks don't get that which is why MANY women aren't having kids but are striving to have a career. Shame that some folks are sexist though and think that women are the better parent so belong at homer while the man should be the sole breadwinner. Times have changed and pay and rules need to change with them. I'm glad these women are fighting and wish more would. Japan would be much better for all if there was a better balance with regards to work, family time and equal pay.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

We asked for no more bickering. tmarie and cleo, please do not address each other any further on this thread.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites