May 2019 SAT in Asia Essay Sample: "Let's Expose the Gender Pay Gap"

Home > SAT Test > SAT Essay > New SAT Essay Sample

May 2019 SAT in Asia Essay Sample: "Let's Expose the Gender Pay Gap"

We have witnessed the noticeable improvement in gender equality; nevertheless, the widening gap in payment has prevented female employees from competing with male counterparts equally. With regard to income inequality, the author Joanne Lipman, encourages companies to release gender pay gap so as to bridge the increasing discrepancies. Here the author takes advantage of factual evidence, refutes the opponents logically and empathizes with females thoroughly.

Ms. Lipman starts the argument with an ironic interrogation "How serious are we, really, about tackling income equality." Such a question entails the highlight—"income equality", and words, "how serious" "really" establish the interrogative tone. Not only do readers keep up with the topic, they also realize Ms. Lipman's disappointment with the gender pay gap. Then, the author indicates that both efforts to reverse this situation are fruitless although "President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act,"and reasons behind it are not comprehensive. Instead of complaining about the income equality, she capitalizes on statistical evidence by mentioning an economist doing research on the persisting gap. Specifically, both female medical stuff and financial specialists receive less remuneration than male counter parts. Also, other data, like "6.6 percent" and "$4600", are cited to reveal the disparity between "women one year out of college" and "men" as well as between "female M.B.A graduates for the first job" and "male for the first job." Therefore, these exact figures respond to the author's statement that "the gap between what men and women earn has defied every effort to close it," and readers tend to continue to identify the main cause and correspondent solutions.

Some readers would conform to the stereotype that "men are intentionally discriminating against women." However,the author has predicted this "common sense" and refers to her interview with male executives as a counterexample—" A vast majority of them are fair-minded guys who want women to succeed." In other words, men actually try to treat female employees fairly. She employs the first-hand experience to invalidate the stereotype and readers are likely to figure out what the root cause is out of curiosity. Therefore, according to the logical progression, the author quotes the reason from another economist Linda Babcock that "men are four times more likely to ask a raise than women are and that when women do ask, they ask30 percent less." The logical explanation ends up with a cause, so readers expect the reason is so clear that a piece of advice can be given—"to demand more". However, the author repeats refutation and claims "it isn't enough." Up to now, Ms. Lipman leads readers to following her argument closely and refutes the predictable answers for two times, so readers' curiosities are further ignited and they understand the income equality seems not simple and feasible.Finally, Lipman introduces "a plan requiring companies with 250 employees or more to publicly report their own gender pay gap," and this plan receives wide support from other countries and even from authorities, like President Obama and David Cameron.

The last section centers on the different comments on the British plan. On the one hand, critics assert that "it's too expensive and complex" and "it doesn't address the root of the problem." On the other hand, "real-world results" are exposed by reference to a case that the firm Price water house Coopers released its gender pay gap and luckily an increasing number of females got promoted. Here Lipman repeats the numerical evidence that "15.1 percent pay disparity reflected a lack of women in senior jobs" and "the percentage of women promoted to partner had more than doubled from only 16 percent." Therefore, the author convinces readers, especially those skeptics, of the narrowing gap if the plan is released. Then, she uses factual evidence to cope with the so-called high cost. Actually, "the potential cost savings of publishing the gender wage gap are enormous" and "the less secrecy about pay results in gender employee loyalty and lower turnover." Now that critics doubt about the feasibility of the plan, the author is ready to eliminate their concerns and optimize evidence to prove the plan is "much-needed sunlight." Before terminating her argument, Lipman employs an interrogative tone to respond to the beginning and arouse readers' reflection on how to "settle the controversy over the pay gap." In other words, the exposure of income equality should be an expedient and readers are expected to embrace it rather than reject it.

Through the effective use of rhetorical tools and the mindful arrangement of this essay, the author persuades the audience that the main idea.

More Information