I think we need to be really clear here. We're not talking about equal pay for equal work anymore. That was, quite frankly, a fight of our mothers and our grandmothers, because there was a time when women doing the same jobs were paid differently. Some of us maybe weren't in the workforce yet, and maybe we were, but I recall the columns for male help wanted and female help wanted.
We're not talking about what you just started out with, which was about being a draftsperson and being paid equally. That's different. We're not talking about equal pay for similar work. That was another fight by women before us. What we're talking about is equal pay for work of equal value. What we're talking about here is that there are jobs that are undervalued.
If the statistics about the participation of women in the workplace you've been giving are correct, then it's even more abysmal that we're still making 70¢ on the dollar on average, in every occupation except one, and that's as nannies. That's the only place where on average women get paid more than men do.
It's abysmal that racialized women in this country get paid about 64¢ on the dollar, that aboriginal women are at 46¢ on the dollar, and that women with disabilities are at around the same amount and have huge amounts of unemployment. By the way, that's for full-time, full-year work. If you start to throw in part-time, contract, and temporary work, on average we're down to 63¢ on the dollar. There's just been a recent study on that.
If you ask whether a deputy minister gets paid the same as another deputy minister, well, there are obviously rules that have been brought in on that. What I'm telling you is that our jobs have been undervalued. We're talking about bringing up the value of the jobs. The fight in Bell Canada was about bringing up the value of the operator's job to be equivalent to male-dominated jobs that had the same or different components of skill, effort, responsibility, and working conditions.