Blatant sexism in Tim Moore's staff salary levels

Welcome back to the 1960's:

A list obtained by North State Journal indicates that Moore's Chief of Staff Bart Goodson, is the highest paid in the office at just more than $172,000 in annual salary, followed by senior adviser Mitch Gillespie at $104,545. In total for 2017, the 14 staff members supporting the N.C. Speaker of the House earn $1,046,135. In 2016, the 13 member staff made $1,108,154.

On the staff list for 2017, is a key promotion; Leah Burns is now deputy chief of staff, earning $69,000. In 2016, Burns served as a policy adviser to the speaker.

In typical Republican fashion, Moore is trying to show off how he's "reduced spending" and "tightened his belt," or whatever is the conservative Pavlovian bell phrase of the day. But it doesn't take Hercule Poirot to figure out where he saved most of that $62,000, by seriously stiffing one of his female employees. I tried to find Bart Goodson's salary (who held the deputy chief of staff position last year) before this promotion, but I had to go back to 2015 to get pertinent numbers:

Tillis’ former policy director, Andy Munn, is now Moore’s deputy chief of staff and makes $120,000. Munn had earned $107,000 under Tillis, while Tillis’ deputy chief of staff made $75,000 last year.

A spokeswoman for Moore said the higher salaries are justified because they reflect “expanded roles in the office.”

There you have it, short and bitter. Goodson's predecessor made $51,000 per year more than Leah Burns is now being paid, and even with the "expanded roles" she is now required to fill, Leah Burns is earning $6,000 per year less than the dude who held the job before said expansion.

No matter which way you slice it, being a female staffer for Tim Moore is a costly choice.

Tags: 

Comments

I just don't get it

After numerous examples of sexism, misogyny, and a blatant disregard for basic civil rights, how can some women continue to support the GOP?

That's not a rhetorical question. There are (apparently) some psycho-social development issues that we Dems just can't comprehend. It's real easy to just write it off as a "symptom of the Patriarchy" or something similar, but we really need to delve deeper. I'm not even going to try to figure out what makes male Trump supporters tick, because that will just piss me off. But females? That is a huge conundrum, and it allowed a petty tyrant and serial sexual harasser to move into the White House.

Let's work on this, so at least we know which fictional dragons to slay.

Stockholm syndrome?

Stockholm syndrome?

Or maybe good old fashioned self loathing.