2. 考研
  3. This week, a gaggle of girls in hot pants and miniskirts will go on a long and highly publicized strike against their employer.

This week, a gaggle of girls in hot pants and miniskirts will go on a long and highly publicized strike against their employer.

admin2020-08-21  3
问题    This week, a gaggle of girls in hot pants and miniskirts will go on a long and highly publicized strike against their employer. They will win their case, and in so doing, win a huge battle for working women everywhere—ushering in a new push for equal pay for women and striking a victorious blow for women’ s rights the world over. But in real life, the news isn’ t nearly that inspiring.
   On Wednesday, the U.S. senate failed to end debate on the paycheck fairness act. The so-called "commonsense law" would have strengthened anti-discriminatory law put in place by the Equal Pay Act, protected employees from being fired for asking about their colleagues’ compensation, and created negotiation skills training programs for girls and women.
   The American Association of University Women recently compared men and women with the same education, same grades, same kinds of jobs, and made the same life choices and found that women earn 5% less in the first year out of school. Ten years later, even if the women gave up having children, they earn 12% less. In another study, Catalyst found that female first-year MBA students earn $4,600 less than their male peers in their first job. In fact, in the 47 years since the Equal Pay Act was first adopted, the pay gap has decreased from more than 40 cents to just under 25 cents. We are literally halfway there.
   The republican senators voting against the act, said the act would have been bad for business. And they have been right, but not for the stated reasons. This recession is frequently called the "mancession" and that it has led to 36% increase in the number of families depending on women’s earning in the last year alone, sure, those businesses may be saving money by paying women less, but is it really in the interest of the American public to allow them to save at the expense of families? At 77 cents on the dollar, women will lose an average of $431,000 in pay over 40 years. Those losses could have been spent wisely. When you consider that women reinvest 90% of their income into their own community and family (just 30% to 40% that men invest), the impact could have been powerful. How is that for the common sense?
Mancession has led to the fact that_____.
选项 A、employers violated Equal Pay Law
B、many families depend on women’ s earnings
C、many businesses saved money by hiring woman
D、women reinvest 90% of their income to their community
答案B
解析 根据题干关键词定位到文章第四段that it has led to 36％ increase in the number of families depending on women’s earning in the last year alone…这里提到Mancession(男人衰退)导致更多家庭单单依靠女性的收入过活，故B项“许多家庭依靠妇女的收入”符合原文。A项“雇主违反了同酬法”、C项“许多企业通过雇佣女性来节省开支”和D项“女性将90％的收入再投资于她们的社区”均不是男性受到经济衰退影响的直接结果，故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/vP1Z777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)