Ideas on the U.S. Open.
Final weekend, I watched giant components of the U.S. Open ladies’s tennis finals on Saturday and males’s finals on Sunday. I watched some excellent tennis.
At varied instances throughout each matches, the digital camera would present Billie Jean King and an announcer would say, with a celebratory voice, that she was the one who had persuaded the organizers of the U.S. Open to present equal prizes to the female and male winners. This 12 months the prize was a cool $3.6 million.
For the final 45 years, I’ve paid consideration to the decision for “equal pay for equal work.” I don’t essentially agree with it, for causes that don’t matter on this context. However I all the time thought that the overwhelming majority of the individuals pushing for it did consider in it.
Now I ponder. Why? As a result of the prize within the U.S. Open is the other of equal pay for equal work. The boys work a lot more durable. To win, the lads should win 3 units. However the ladies want win solely 2 units. And that is true for the entire 2 weeks. Each match between males is the most effective of 5. Each match between ladies is the most effective of three.
But I hear nobody making that time.
Was the decision for “equal pay for equal work” insincere? Is it dangerous if males get the identical pay for much less work however effective if ladies get the identical pay for much less work?
