Does your calculation try to recreate the 0.83 $ statistic by assuming the proportion of the workforce of a given (gender, race) is the same as the population as a whole?

Because that's not necessarily a valid assumption.

I flagged the article.

Maybe the author could re-post a version that has a better breakdown of race and genders?

Current one excludes black males, Asian males as well as Hispanic whites. Also doesn’t aggregate per occupation, seniority nor immigration status. And despite mainly focusing on gender equity omits white woman?

There has been a trend in social studies lately to just group whites and Asians together when convenient in order to avoid discussing certain issue [0]. Hope the author isn’t trying the same tactics here [1].

[0] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/ex-recruiter-accu...

[1] https://nextshark.com/students-of-color-washington-asians-wi...

It's like when they say that whites dominate managerial positions but they conveniently conflate Jews with whites.

Are we not white? Whenever there's a drop-down that's what I select.

Latino is considered white now?

there are white Latinos. they would've been descendants of Spanish or Portuguese colonizers who didn't intermarry much or at all. Latino is an ethnicity, white is a race, at least according to the Census.

Louis CK, Snooki, Vanna White, Charlie Sheen, Nicole Richie, and Ryan Lochte are all considered white, but have Latino ancestry.

Many latinos have white skin.