Equality Part II

Let me give you a scenario before I make my point:  John and Sue both graduate with a MBA, finishing in the ninetieth percentile.  They both have the same birthday, month and year.  They are both hired by Mega Corp. the same day, again same year.  They are both paid the same salary.  They both do the same job and they both do the same quality of work.  Two years in, Sue goes on maternity leave.  She stays on leave for two years.  42 months in, John is rewarded with a pay raise and a small promotion for time served and good work.  Sue returns to work at the four year mark.  She is doing the same job as John.  She is working the same hours, more or less--sometimes there are unexpected family emergencies.  She has the same education and started the same day.  Now, she is making 20% less than her male counterpart.  A government inspector comes in and asks some questions of employees regarding work place equality standards.  She is shocked at the draconian practice of paying female workers with the same credentials 80 cents on the dollar when compared to their male counterparts.  They started the same day.  They have the same education.  They've been with the company the same length of time.  They do the same work.  No other questions are asked or digging is done.  The company is issued corrective action orders.  What is missing?  Actually, I think I have made my point.

Also, what about if Sue chooses to be a nurse and John chooses to be an engineer--those professions are both heavily imbalanced?  When a census is taken, the numbers aren't explained here either, John just makes more and he is a man.  Should the government's role be to force--through legislation--the hiring of less qualified men over better qualified women until there is a gender balance in nursing?