The company behind the “Fearless girl” statue is paying a $5 million settlement for salary discrimination against women


Why is it that the people always trying to push diversity and equality down everyone else’s throats always find it hard to live by the same rules they want others to live by? We all remember a couple months ago when State Street Global Advisors, one of the world’s largest investment firms, decided to signal their virtue by paying for a “fearless girl” statue to be erected on wall street, facing down the famous wall street charging bull statue.

The statue was erected by the Investment firm in honor of Women’s History Month and was praised by Feminists the world over for supporting women in finance. “We believe that corporate board diversity enhances board quality and effectiveness,” reads a statement the company published when it put the statue up.

Evidently, State Street Global advisors didn’t think this rule of “diversity” applies to them, because the company was just forced to pay about $4.5 million for paying men more than women:

State Street Global Advisors’ parent company—has agreed to pay nearly $4.5 million in back pay and over $507,000 in interest to settle a dispute alleging the company paid female and black employees less than white men. According to documents filed Oct. 5 (pdf) by the US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Program (OFCCP),
“since at least December 1, 2010, and continuing thereafter, State Street discriminated against Females employed in the Senior Vice President (SVP), Managing Director (MD), and Vice President (VP) positions by paying them less, in base salary, bonus pay and total compensation, than similarly situated Males employed in the same position.”

But wait, there’s more….. the company doesn’t pay black people equally either:

The OFCCP also found that State Street similarly discriminated against black employees in the VP position. The analysis of the compensations of 305 female and 15 black employees was prompted by information collected during a compliance review. The company was informed of the results of the investigation on Mar. 31, and rejected the findings. Today (Oct. 5) it agreed to settle instead of taking the case to court

Talk about hypocrisy.