Return to Transcripts main page


Paul Ryan Rules Out Presidential Bid; Al Jazeera America Signs Off; Obama Dedicates Monument to Women's Equality; Study: Pay Gap Hits Hard in Retirement for Women; Malone: Pay Equity Will lift Women Out of Poverty; Maloney: Wage Gap is Unfair and Wrong; Maloney Pay Disparity Grows Over Lifetime; Patricia Arquette calls for Equal Pay; Arquette: Equal Pay Stance has Cost Me Jobs; Scoot Attempts Long-Haul at Low-Cost; Scoot Tests Limits of Low-Cost Model; Scoot CEO: We Focus on the Leisure Traveler; Scoot CEO: We are Writing the Rules of Low-Cost; "Stairway to Heaven: Suit Going to Trial; Band "Spirit" Claims Song Opening was Stolen; Led Zeppelin Guitarist: Claims are "Ridiculous"; Australia's $5 Note Gets a Makeover

Aired April 12, 2016 - 16:00:00   ET



PAULA NEWTON, HOST: The Dow sails to a triple digit gain as Carnival rings the closing bell. It's Tuesday, April 12th, it's a day women don't want to

celebrate though.


NEWTON: The fight for equal pay from Wall Street to Hollywood. Europe and the U.S. are turning inward. The IMF warns that may damage the global

economy. And buying a stairway to heaven or stealing it. A new lawsuit claims it was stolen from another band.


NEWTON: I'm Paula Newton and this is "Quest Means Business.

Now it's a day many women would rather not celebrate. On April 12th, if you're a woman, you're earnings have finally caught up to a man's earnings

from the previous year. That means she's working about an extra four months just to make the same annual salary as he did.


NEWTON: Now, in the U.S., women are typically paid 79 cents on the dollar compared to men. And it's worse for minorities. Hispanic women are paid

just 54% of what white men are paid.

Now, over a life time, the pay gap can cost women more than $430,000. Now at the current rate, women's pay won't catch up to men's until 2059. Now

the disparity in the United States is greater than it is in 22 of 34 developed countries.


NEWTON: Now career coaches say one reason for that pay gap exist that's the fact that women simply aren't as effective as asking for that raise.

Claire Sebastian and Samuel Burke put their negotiating skills to the test.


CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN MONEY CORRESPONDENT: It's that moment many of us dread.


SEBASTIAN: The long walk to the boss' office to ask that crucial question.

Can I have a raise? Last year, glamour magazine found 57% of women have never asked for a raise.

BURKE: Compared to just 46% of men.

SEBASTIAN: We wanted to find out why so we are submitting ourselves to an experiment.

BURKE: So we invited a top New York career coach to the CNN offices and she's going to pretend to be our boss as we do some mock salary


SEBASTIAN: And we're going to see who performs best.

ELIZABETH CRONISE MCLAUGHLIN, EXECUTIVE COACH: The reality is that men have been conditioned to negotiate because they were earners and because their

value has been equated to the amount of money that they bring in whereas we have not over the course of history.

BURKE: For the experiment, we're using our real jobs, CNN journalists.

SEBASTIAN: And of course our real personalities.

BURKE: Everything else is based on general aspects of this industry.



MCLAUGHLIN: How are you?

SEBASTIAN: I'm good, how are you?

BURKE: Hey, boss, good to see you.

MCLAUGHLIN: Hey, good to see you. What can I do for you today?

BURKE: Well, I've been going over some of the numbers with HT.

SEBASTIAN: Right from the start, the difference is stark.

MCLAUGHLIN: Scattered eye contact. And your body language was sort of hanging back a bit and the wringing of the hands. Sam came in very

forcefully, he was facing forward here strong spine, very confident in the way that he projected his ask.

Generally the raise that we give to everyone every year for good performance is 3%.

BURKE: We both decided to ask for more than 3%. The average pay rise across major U.S. employers this year.

SEBASTIAN: We didn't tell each other exactly how much more.

SEBASTIAN: So I wanted to discuss whether we can look at perhaps a slightly higher than average increase this year, maybe around 6%.

BURKE: I really think that a 10% raise would be reflective of the type of work that I've been doing.

MCLAUGHLIN: It's an issue because most women will come in and negotiate at their bottom line. If you do not come in at higher than what you want,

there's nowhere to meet in the middle.

SEBASTIAN: So first, you start high.

BURKE: Then you have to justify it.

BURKE: It's the sponsorships that I brought in for the company, the segments that I have been doing have been bringing in more money

continuously than any of other people in our group.

SEBASTIAN: I've been mentoring a lot of the younger members of the team and I'm helping them to kind of discover their own talent.

While I talked about what HR execs call soft skills.

BURKE: I went straight for the bottom line.

MCLAUGHLIN: This is a very standard expected gender differential in the way that men and women negotiate. But when it comes to money, money has to

equal money. And so what you're bringing in really needs to be the first justification.

BURKE: Did we get the raise?


SEBASTIAN: Both of us?

MCLAUGHLIN: Both of you.

BURKE: Different amounts?

MCLAUGHLIN: Different amounts of course though. Because you didn't give me quite enough room. I could come back and say to him fine, you're getting

6%, you asked for 10, I got you six. But you probably would have ended up with 5%.

SEBASTIAN: Clare Sebastian.

BURKE: And Samuel Burke.

CNN Money, New York.

Congratulations on your raise.

SEBASTIAN: Thank you, thank you, well done.


NEWTON: Clare looks a bit annoyed there, I don't blame her. It was such a revealing discussion. And the experts tell us this goes on in every single

solitary industry.

Now, online, a job site Glassdoor shows industries where the wage gap is the biggest though.


Now female Psychologists earn just 73 cents on the dollar compared to male counterparts. Now for dentists, you wouldn't really believe this would you,

but it's 72 cents. And the same goes for women in c suite jobs as well as chefs and computer programs. What's so interesting is that you can actually

compare these within the same profession. That means a man and a woman doing the exact same job.

Now I spoke to Ellevest CEO Sallie Krawcheck and I asked her what will it take to make progress closing that gender pay gap.


SALLIE KRAWCHECK, ELLEVEST CEO: You have to look at CEOs like Mark Benioff at Salesforce who did the analysis work on the numbers and, you know what,

we didn't think we had a gender pay gap, we have one and we're going to close it. And while it appears to be a $3 million cost to him, look,

keeping women in the workforce, there is a relationship between more pay and staying in the workforce, that matters. Making waves of it -- we as

customers and clients want to do business with companies that treat their people fairly. So I think there is a return. So I think the CEOs doing

something about it.

And you know the thing that makes me really excited I think it's women having more options. It's visibility in the companies and what your

company's doing versus another. And then the one that I'm really excited about is the ability for us as women and everyone to start businesses these

days to have the values we want to live.


NEWTON: The starting your own business certainly comes as an empowerment issue but Sallie, I'm going to ask you directly, perhaps you've had the

offers recently. You're on the board of your company, but you know these board positions; it doesn't matter if we look at CEO statistics or board

statistics. Still, it's paltry. Single digit percentages in terms of the women involved. How do we get those numbers up?

KRAWCHECK: Well, advocacy, talking about it, and then I again come back to starting our own businesses, building the businesses that we want to build

and building our own boards too.

You know I've recently become an entrepreneur and the cost of starting a business today is coming down so dramatically that this is an opportunity

that's available to so many more people than it was before. Building career paths that make sense for us in our lives. Freelancing is now becoming a

real option for individuals.

And so you know I think if we wait and wait for the guys, as much as we love the guys to invite us in, we're going to make slow progress. But if we

recognize there are actions that we can take, be it networking with each other bringing each other onto the boards or starting our own businesses,

those can have real substantial impact.

NEWTON: And Sallie unfortunately a lot of what you and I are discussing is for women who are privileged. I mean when you talk about women at the lower

end of the pay scale, do they absolutely need to have that legislation in place?

KRAWCHECK: Well, you know, women, the majority of individuals who are in poverty are women. And what's a shame in this country today in the United

States of America today, is we are the only developed country that doesn't have mandated parental leave. And companies can put these in place for

themselves but according to the research, it's only about 20% of companies that offer paid maternal leave.

This is good for people. It's good for families, it's good for women, it's good for economies. If you give women mandated parental leaves, if you have

the ability to heal after they have children they are more likely to come back to work. And if we can get women as economically engaged as men we can

grow the U.S. economy depending on the piece of research by 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 percentage points of GDP. So it grows the economy, it's good for everyone.

NEWTON: And that's maybe a little bit controversial in terms of what you said, there are many people who do not believe it can actually grow the



NEWTON: One person who does is Patricia Arquette. She doesn't play an activist on screen; she's an activist in real life. And the Academy Award

winning actress says her fight for equal pay has cost her roles and we will have more with her later in this program.


NEWTON: Now, global growth is ever slowing and the world's economy looks increasingly fragile. That's the gloomy assessment from the International

Monetary Fund. The IMF has slashed its forecast for worldwide growth in 2016.


NEWTON: It blamed the last few shaky months on financial markets for that cut. And says there is a risk of what it calls turbulence. And it could

turn stocks or China's slowing economy could still yet spit out a surprise for everyone.

Now the fund also hacked away at its forecast for oil production countries as they continue of course to suffer from the historic slump in crude.

Now outside of the economic sphere, the IMF says the central - pardon me the general rise of nationalism in U.S. and Europe is creating of course

uncertainty and threatening growth. It's also sounding the alarm on trade earning of several regional -- severe regional and global damage if they

are entering the political fray here saying if Britain votes to leave the European Union.



NEWTON: Now I was joined earlier by the IMF's chief economist, Maurice Obstfeld. I asked him why the fund decided at this point in time to comment

on "brexit."


MAURICE OBSTFELD, IMF CHIEF ECONOMIST: Everything we know from economics tells us that less uncertainty is better. And certainly uncertainty now is

weighing on the growth of the British economy. If there is a vote to leave the E.U. there would be a protected negotiation with Britain's trade

status, quite uncertain not only within Europe but worldwide. So it's hard to believe that that will be a big positive for the British economy.

NEWTON: And if we go further, go into your report, it certainly garnered a lot of headlines. Mainly because you're talking about the threat of

synchronized slow-down. The alarm bells have gone off for the IMF but where do we go toward solution? You're certainly an organization that's always

praised you know fiscal restraint and yet now it seems you want countries to move towards more fiscal stimulus. Where is your cut-off line on that?

OBSTFELD: Well we think that countries need to either have or to bolster median term fiscal frameworks which make clear how they're going to

maintain fiscal sustainability. Basically how they're going to make the books balance over time. But given that, there could be times when fiscal

stimulus is needed so we're not recommending a one-size fits all strategy, you know, everyone needs to expand, everyone needs to expand now. But there

are cases where expansion could be helpful and possible.

If you look at Canada now, they are taking that route which I think it's going to be beneficial to their economy. There's a strong case for

infrastructure investment. There's also a strong case for balanced budget tax reforms that might promote structural benefits as labor force

participation that could help both with aggregate demand and with social cohesion.

NEWTON: You know one thing though if you look at Canada, not anyone really even in some cases in the E.U. has that kind of a balance sheet to work

from. When you look at the E.U. especially, and the risks going forward, I mean, the wording in your report is quite clear. There is still a risk of

global recession. What do you think would tip the balance there? Is it China? Is it the risks in the E.U.?

OBSTFELD: Well, we see a number of risks. China growth has of course been on the radar of financial markets, for a while, certainly very acutely

since august. If we look at the E.U., there are certainly challenges there in terms of absorbing refugees, which, you know, is a challenge but also an

opportunity. If they can be well integrated into workforces, they can yield a demographic dividend and aid in labour force growth and output growth.

So, you know, all in all, a number of risks coming at the same time, raising the possibility of some of the downside scenarios. Which need not

be reaccessioned by the way but could be a further protracted slowdown in growth.

NEWTON: But it's clear from what you're saying in the report that the lessons learned from 2008, 2009, that none of the reform really has been

put into action. Is that why we are still at this kind of a risk in 2016?

OBSTFELD: Well, I wouldn't say at all that none of the reform has been put into action. I think there's been quite a lot of progress you can point to.

It's not complete. It's not as much as we would perhaps hope for. But a lot - a lot has been accomplished. I don't want to, you know, downplay that at


But we do see new challenges. So these are really new challenges, they're not leftovers from the financial crisis. There are those too, but we are

seeing some new events that give us pause.


NEWTON: Now, despite what the IMF was saying in its report about oil prices, today, oil prices are shooting up and we'll look at what's been

fuelling that rise.



NEWTON: Oil prices surged to their highest levels of the year on Tuesday. Brent Crude is up nearly 4% this hour. No, that's not a mistake, you're

reading that right. This is after reports that Russia and Saudi Arabia have agreed finally to freeze output.


NEWTON: That's coming from unidentified sources speaking to Interfax, the world's top oil producers are due, though, to meet in Doha this weekend to

try and discuss that freeze. It's hoped that will help ease some of the supply glut that's been holding down prices.

Now Heather Long is CNN Money's senior stock market and economy writer, she joins me now live.


NEWTON: I mean Heather, it kind of took some people by surprise. We've had some momentum in oil, why today and why at those levels 4%?

HEATHER LONG, CNN MONEY SENIOR STOCK MARKET AND ECONOMY WRITER: I think there's two key takeaways here, Paula. And the first one is that this is a

freeze, it is not a cut. And so the world still has way more oil than it needs. And even if Saudi Arabia and Russia are able to make this freeze

hold, I think you need to have a lot of skepticism this is going to change the imbalance that we have in the world oil market. So yes, we see this 4%.

The market is hopeful, the market wants to think that Saudi Arabia may finally be regaining some control over OPEC, there's been a lot of tension

within OPEC. But I think a little bit of skepticism is very healthy.

I think the second key takeaway here is, you know, why today really goes to the heart of Saudi Arabia is hurting. Their strategy has been very clear

for the last year, if not longer, that they are trying to drive U.S. oil production out of business as much as possible. And has that succeeded, it

has not.


LONG: You know the United States oil production in 2015 had a 43-year high. How much is it down from that peak? A mere 5%. That's barely a dent.

So I think they're looking around and saying we need a little bit different strategy.


NEWTON: And the different strategy is to try and take some of that supply away. But as you astutely pointed out, we are at some record production

levels around the world. What do you think the U.S. producers are thinking now? They had to take some production online but do you think already at

some of these new prices that U.S. producers are saying, look, maybe we can get back in the game and we don't have to keep cutting production?

LONG: I think it's an open debate. And we're certainly going to see as earning season comes under way a lot of what the CEOs are saying. In the

United States, there's a belief that the key number's around 50, but you're right, now that we're back above 40, I think they do begin to make that

calculus of how quickly do we want to get back online.

The other key factor that we're not talking about is Iran. So the last time that Saudi Arabia and Russia talked about doing some sort of a production

freeze, that was only at the end of February and Iran immediately comes out and says, we think this is a joke. There is no way we are going to cut back

on our production. As a matter of fact, they're trying to ramp up their production now. And so again, that could still mean more oil and lower

prices going forward.

NEWTON: Yes, and such a great thing to point out, Iran will be at the meeting on the weekend. And as you said, there's no clear indication they

will freeze any of their output. Heather Long, thanks so much, appreciate it.

LONG: Thank you.

NEWTON: Now stocks in the U.S. shot higher at the beginning of trading on Wall Street and they never really looked back.


NEWTON: I mean it was kind of tense there for a little while. You thought they might lose some momentum but no, the Dow added 164 points, nearly 1%

and it was on the coattails of that near 4% rise that Heather and I were just talking about. But I have to say, financials were kind of strong

there, which was also surprising.

Now if you were watching at the top of our show, you will have seen my next guest ringing the closing bell.


NEWTON: He is the CEO of Carnival Corporation, Arnold Donald, and he wants to put his ships in China and Cuba. He joins me now from the New York

Stock Exchange.

I have to ask you, first, we'll go to what's headlining. You're going to be in Cuba. Much anticipation around this in terms of how much do you think it

will transform cruising in that Caribbean area?

ARNOLD DONALD, CEO CARNICAL CORPORATION: Good afternoon, Paula, good to be with you. We're excited yes. We're on the first in history, in the last 50

years, for the U.S. and Cuba both to approve cruise travel from the U.S. to Cuba and back.


DONALD: In terms of how it's going to transfer the Caribbean, we're starting with only one ship (inaudible). If people want to book, there's

still a few cabins left for the inaugural sailing on May 1st. But it will over time be a refresher for the Caribbean, which is the largest

destination cruise market in the world already. But more people in the U.S. will be going back to the Caribbean they have the opportunity to visit


NEWTON: You know it is a very political move though as well. Certainly, some U.S. companies haven't been able to go into Cuba the way they wanted

to. And now certainly some controversy with your inaugural ship. I mean Cuban-Americans are saying they're not going to be allowed. How much does

that concern you and re you doing anything to try and change that?

DONALD: Well of course we're doing something to try to change it. But just -- the facts are there is a mode of transport policy that exists today in

Cuba for all Cuban citizens. And Cuba defines that as anyone born in Cuba. So that's for existing residents of Cuba as well as anyone else that was

born in Cuba that lives anywhere else in the world. And that mode of transport policy is it's okay to fly into Cuba, but it's not okay to travel

by sea. So they don't allow any ships, boats, ferries, whatever, for Cuban- born individuals.

So of course we feel that's you know unfair in terms of travel by air versus travel by sea. We want everyone to be able to travel and go and

we're working on that and we have been working on that and we continue to petition. Obviously, we will respect the laws of a Sovereign nation. We

will respect the laws and regulations but we're cautiously optimistic that with things changing the way they are, for example, for us going in the

first place, that we'll have the opportunity to get this decades long policy that's been in place relieved for crews and especially ours.

NEWTON: I'm sure many people will be watching to see how that develops and how quickly it develops.

I want to talk to you you know we're used to a lot of publicity from Carnival when you unveil a new ship of course but there are some new

ventures that have caught our eye. One that caught my eye is your association with virtual reality. I mean, explain what that's all about.

DONALD: Well, you know, a lot of people have never taken a cruise and they have a lot of myths about cruising and so our effort to debunk the myths

about cruising, we partnered with some virtual reality experience, with AT&T stores and Samsung. Initially we had a few stores about 300, it was

expanded to 1,200. Now it's in 2,000 stores across America, AT&T, where you can go into an AT&T store and experience a virtual reality part of a

cruise. So it's our way to emote cruising to those who've never had the opportunity to cruise and for them to get a feel what cruising is really


NEWTON: You think emote cruising, do you still think -- you're still trying to get those people who will say, look, I'm never going on one of those

ships. Because you know that attitude is out there.

DONALD: Yes, Paula, look, cruising is the greatest vacation experience there is. It's the greatest vacation value there is and virtuality is one

way to take it to people. But the best way is for someone to book and book soon and take a cruise.

NEWTON: Donald, thanks so much and we will continue to await news of that first journey, that first cruise to Cuba, appreciate your time today.

DONALD: Thank you, Paula.

NEWTON: European markets in the meantime closed mostly higher on Tuesday.


NEWTON: Mining companies rose, Italian stocks fell, Italian banks ended mixed after Italian officials created a bailout fund that some said was far

too small.


NEWTON: Now new rules in the meantime are in the works to force large companies working in Europe to be more open about their finances and

specifically about tax. Now the proposal comes amid public outrage over tax avoidance revealed in the leaked "Panama Papers."

Nina dos Santos is CNN Money's Europe Editor.


NINA DOS SANTOS, CNN MONEY'S EUROPE EDITOR: Big business beware for large firms operating across the E.U., the rules on tax are changing at lightning


In a major new initiative which could affect more than 6,000 companies, the European Commission unveiled plans to force multinationals tax affairs out

into the public domain leaving no room to hide for those using tax havens and loopholes to bring down their bills. Schemes that lose Europe $60 and

$80 billion in lost revenues every single year.

JONATHAN HILL, EUROPEAN COMMISSIONER, FINANCIAL SERVICES: The proposal we're unveiling today builds on the work that's been taken forward under

the aegis of the OECD to require the sharing of information related to corporate income tax between tax authorities. This proposal goes a step

further than that and it will require those biggest multinationals to make that key information public.

SANTOS: Well research by the European parliament shows that 88% of E.U. citizens were in favor of tightening laws to prevent aggressive tax

avoidance by big firms. The plans mooted mean that these kind of entities with sales of over $855 million will be forced to unveil how much profit

they made in each individual E.U. country in which they operate as well as how much tax they paid in that very state. And that includes tax havens

within the blocs and borders.


SANTOS: Foreign firms with E.U. subsidiaries will also be affected as well. And that means we could soon see the likes of Starbucks, Apple and Google

opening up their books inside Europe to closer public scrutiny.

The new proposals put forward aren't designed to make tax avoidance illegal or indeed increase the penalties for those who illegally evade tax but

rather their objective is to force firm's affairs out into the open in the hope that such disclosure will discourage them from trying to pay less tax

in the first place.

However to work campaigners say that these crackdowns must be orchestrated at an international level which is why both the G20 and also the OECD are

taking their own action to.

There will of course be some who are likely to say that the only winners from these new initiatives are likely to be accountants and tax lawyers.

But if they pass through the E.U.s own parliament, well Europe could soon have new tax laws in place within just a few years from here.

Nina Dos Santos, CNN Money, London.


NEWTON: Patricia Arquette is an award winning actress and she says she has lost roles because of her push for equal pay.


NEWTON: Hello, I'm Paula Newton. There's more of "Quest Means Business" in a moment when actress Patricia Arquette joins the fight against the gender

pay gap, she'll be with me live in just a few moments. And stairway to court. A copyright case against that famous Led Zeppelin hit.

Before that, though, the news stories we're following this hour.


NEWTON: Oil prices have jumped 4% to a high for 2016 after rumors Russia and Saudi Arabia have agreed to freeze their output. Now this ahead of an

oil producers summit in Doha this coming weekend to try and hash out an output freeze.

Boka Haram militants are increasingly using children as suicide bombers in Nigeria. That's according to a new report from UNICEF, it finds that dozens

of children were used in suicide attacks in 2015. That's a ten-fold increase from the year before.

Paul Ryan, the top Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives, wants to end speculation once and for all. He says he will not run for President,

no matter who may try and enlist him at the Republican convention this summer. Speaking a short time ago, he said only candidates participating in

the primary should be eligible.

[16:30:00] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PAUL RYAN, R-WI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: If no candidate has a majority on the first ballot, I believe you should only choose from a person who has

actually participated in the primary. Count me out. I simply believe that if you want to be the nominee for our party, to be the president, you

should actually run for it. I chose not to do this. Therefore, I should not be considered period, end of story.


PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: In just a few hours now, CNN will host a town hall with Donald Trump and his whole family. It's part of a three night

series featuring each of the remaining Republican candidates in New York, hosted by CNN's Anderson Cooper. It airs Wednesday at 2 a.m. in London.

That's only right here on CNN.

Channel Al Jazeera America is preparing to sign off later today. It started less than three years ago as a U.S. offshoot of Al Jazeera a

network funded by Qatar. Its ratings were never high, and in January the board decided to pull the plug. About 700 people will lose their jobs with

this closing.

America's newest national Monument is in honor of women's equality. President Barack Obama dedicated the monument earlier today to coincide

with Equal Payday in the United States. Now Historic Washington Homestead was central to the women's rights movement. President Obama said it was

important to finally close that wage gap.


Barack Obama, U.S. President: equal pay for equal work should be a fundamental principle of our economy. It's an idea that whether you're a

high school teacher, a business executive, or a professional soccer player or tennis player, your work should be equally valued and rewarded, whether

you are a man or a woman. This is a simple idea.


NEWTON: Yes, he calls it simple but it's potentially still decades from being fully realized in the United States. Now we want to take a look at

the history of wages in the United States. Now in 1938, born out of the Great Depression, the Fair Labor Standards Act established a national

minimum wage without regards to sex. Now when he sent the bill to Congress, President Roosevelt said America should be able to give all able-

bodied working men and women a fair days pay for a fair days work. 25 years later, John F. Kennedy signed into law the Equal Pay Act of 1963.

It was an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act aimed at abolishing the gender pay gap.

At that time women were paid just 59 percent of what men were paid. Now in 2009 The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the first bill signed into law by

President Obama made it easier for workers to sue employers for pay discrimination. Now earlier I spoke to Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney, who

has spent decades fighting for women's rights on Capitol Hill. She has just released a report into gender pay equality. I began by asking her

what she thinks it's holding back from actually closing the gender gap.

CAROLYN MALONEY, U.S. CONGRESSWOMAN: The policies haven't changed to reflect the 21st century. The fact that so many women are in the

workforce, and that 40 percent of family income comes from a woman's salary. So when you discriminate against a woman, you are discriminating

against her children, her spouse and I'd say the overall economy. One of the easiest ways to live people out of poverty it's to pay women equally

and fairly for their work. It's now 2016 and were still 79 cents to the dollar. We may have gotten a pay raise since 1963 and they sign the equal

pay act from 59 cent to the dollar, 79 cents to the dollar. But at the rate were going it'll be 2059 before women reach equality and that's

unfair, and it's wrong.

NEWTON: When you look at the research, is the problem more within professionals or also across professionals?

MALONEY: It's within professions and across professions. Professions that are dominated by women, such as education and healthcare. Women are

treated more fairly. And professions such as financial services the gap is there. What was so interesting about this study from the Joint Economic

Committee, it not only looked at the wage gap, but what does it mean over a lifetime? And it showed that women may start out near parity, as young

women and young men, but as they age the disparity grows and grows. That over age 75 women are twice as likely as men to live in poverty. While we

are the largest segment of older people in poverty. And it shows that your pension, your retirement, your savings, everything is lower because of the

inequity you have during your lifetime.


[16:35:00] NEWTON: Now, Patricia Arquette uses one of her career's brightest moments to shed light on the gender pay gap when accepting an

Oscar in 2015 for best supporting actress -- best actress in a supporting role, Arquette declared that the time for change has come, she said, "To

every woman who gave birth to every taxpayer and citizen of this nation, we have fought for everybody else's equal rights. It's our time to have wage

equality, once and for all, and equal rights for women in the United States of America." Patricia Arquette says she's lost roles since then. She is

teaming up with members of the U.S. Congress to fight for gender pay equality. And she joins me now live from Washington. Thanks Ms.

Arquette, really appreciate your time today. You know, to share that moment in the spotlight with this issue. For people who don't know, why is

his personal to you?

PATRICIA ARQUETTE, ACADEMY AWARD WINNING ACTRESS: Well, I was a single mother at 20 years old and I struggled to take care of my son, to buy

diapers and food while we lived in a converted garage. I saw my mom struggle with economic insecurity. And I think that made a big impact on

me. And my job as an actress to understand the human condition, and obviously I've always played women. So when I looked at all my friends in

the world around me the negative impact of pay inequality. And I thought it was really critical for us to take this time to start really doing

something about it once and for all. A friend of mine made a documentary called "Equal Means Equal," which will be coming out in the not-too-distant

future. And it really looks comprehensively how women's lack of equal rights are impacting them.

NEWTON: You know, I was sitting at home, like so many other people watching that moment on TV, and when you said it, I kind of thought, "Wow,

this will put this issue back on the agenda." Because it's been on and off the agenda for such a long time. And I was shocked to learn that you

actually say that you feel in some ways you're still kind of being discriminated against because you made it an issue.

ARQUETTE: Well, I don't feel I'm being discriminated against because I've made it an issue. I just think it's clearly -- we've had dad on this for

decades. There has been very little movement. There's very little interest in Washington to actually bring about change. So I don't feel

discriminated against personally, I just feel like it's part of the undercurrent of bias. It seems to be OK in the United States to

discriminate against women economically. That's the reality.

NEWTON: Jennifer Lawrence saying -- she came out just a little bit after you did to say that, yes, she thinks she's always had to try and fight and

that she was quite upset to learn she wasn't getting the same. And just a few weeks ago we learned at the U.S. women's soccer team would be suing to

get equal pay. I mean, how much do you think it's helpful for people like that who are prominent to come out and actually state their case and say

this is wrong.

ARQUETTE: I think it's really critical for each and every one of us to stand up to our leaders and say enough is enough. Women have waited 227

years for equal rights in the United States. We are still not protected by her own Constitution, our own founding document in the United States of

America. We need equal pay and we need it now. Whether you work in a tire factory, like Lily Ledbetter, or you work at the largest retailer in the

nation like Betty Dukes. We need equal protections for women. They find that when women enter a higher paying arena, actually the pay scale goes

down. So there's some discrimination going on, and we can afford it anymore. We have one in five hungry kids in America. 33 million women and

kids who are living in poverty in the United States would not be if there mom was just paid her full dollar.

NEWTON: Yes, incredible statistics there. When you look at what you're doing, is it the patient steady activism that works? Or do you really

think the only way things are going to change as if there mandated by law?

ARQUETTE: I think they need to be mandated by law, absolutely, 100 percent. And I think we need to hold our lawmakers accountable. Look, all

of these elections are going to be hotly contested, and they're going to be one by margins. The largest voting bloc in the nation are women. I would

really like somebody to ask at this next debate how each of the candidate's stands, where they stand, on women having equal constitutional rights.

Because Supreme Court Justice Scalia said the Constitution certainly doesn't sorry -- the Constitution doesn't -- sorry, never mind.

[16:40:00] the Constitution doesn't require discrimination on the basis of sex. The question is whether it prohibits it. It does not. So when you

have a Supreme Court Justice telling you that, and you have Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, saying, the one amendment she'd like to see past in her

lifetime is the equal rights amendment. I think we should listen to them.

NEWTON: Well, we will certainly continue to watch this whole campaign with interest, and really appreciate your time this afternoon.

ARQUETTE: Thank you.

NEWTON: Now, you've heard of low-cost carriers, and of course you've heard of long haul flights. After the break, will join Richard and CEO of Scoot,

the airline out of Singapore that's doing long-haul for low-cost.


NEWTON: Someone said cartoon Richard there is here. Low-cost airlines spreading out, going further in apparently offering more. Now the

phenomenon is known as low-cost, long-haul and airlines like Singapore's Scoot are making a possible cheaper trip. They couldn't have happened, I

mean absolutely did not happen just a few years ago. Now Doreen Richards around the world trip he flew all the way from Singapore to Sydney for 230

bucks at eight hours and more than 6000 kilometers. Scoot is testing the limits of the low-cost model. CEO Campbell Wilson joined Richard on board.

He explained how the airline had ridden the low-cost boom to come a long way in a short time.


CAMPBELL WILSON, SCOOT CEO: We've come from obviously nothing to now where we have six destinations in China, Japan, Korea. We cover all the major

metros in Australia. Were about to get into India in the next couple of months, Saudi Arabia. We've established an airline that is now profitable.

Our last quarter made $18 million. We have carried 6 million people. I think we're on good track for the future.

QUEST: The issue of long-haul low-cost had been questionable. Jetstar was managing it out of Australia. But in slightly different circumstances.

You did it differently.

WILSON: Well, Singapore is only 5 billion people. It's got a reasonable population but a limited one. Likewise for inbound tourism there only so

much that Singapore can accommodate. So from day one, we knew we had to be in network sort of airline. So we were augmenting the Singapore Airlines

group by flying to new destinations such as secondary destinations in China, but also working very closely with Tiger and others to build a

Singapore-based network of low-cost airlines. In order to bring people to as well as through.

QUEST: Is your -- what's your percentage from what you can tell of business versus leisure travel? Because most low-cost airlines within

airlines, the Jetstar model, the Euro, IndiGo, and things are aiming for leisure.

WILSON: Absolutely the same with us too, that's why it's called Scoot, that's where tagline is get out of here. It is really focused on the

leisure traveler. But it's not just the leisure traveler, if you want to travel from Singapore to Qingdao, there isn't any other nonstop option. So

we do carry the commercial traveler in that respect. But yes, it's a low cost focused airline.

[16:45:00] We have some perks that the business traveler will enjoy, such as Scoot cabins, such as Wi-Fi, such business class, frequent flyer miles,

which are part of the Singapore Airlines program. So there will be some perks, but yes, it's truly low-cost focus.

QUEST: The purists would hear your last answer, free Wi-Fi, a meal, business class, frequent flyer points. The purists of low costs will be

having a conniption fit.

WILSON: Well, I wouldn't say it's free. I work but it's chargeable. The frequent flyer points are chargeable. It's really a menu of items that

people can choose based their perception or value of what they want.

QUEST: Do you get the feeling that because long-haul low-cost have not been done before in quite this way, and everybody said it couldn't be done

this way, that you are writing the rules to some extent?

WILSON: I think so. In some respect, we are. There's a few practitioners of this model. I think we all started around this time. We're all finding

our way. But we grew from an ecosystem that already existing. I think if we tried to start a low costs long-haul airline 15 years ago before the

infrastructure and ecosystem was a place, it would've been very much more difficult. But we are writing the rules and having some fun along the way

of course.


NEWTON: Why is Richard having so much fun even on this? I thought it might be a little bit of torture but apparently not, he loved this trip.

You can see Richard take flight on the first part of his round the world trip. "BUSINESS TRAVELER" airs this Thursday at 9:30 a.m. in London.

It's one of the most request and most played rock anthems of all time. Now, 45 years after it was released, "Stairway to Heaven" is going before a

jury. Led Zeppelin stands accused of plagiarism.


NEWTON: It's the legendary eight minute anthem that's kept every generation rocking out since the 1970s. Ok, I stopped to convince my kids

of that. But whatever, it starts as a haunting acoustic slow dance and ends as a heavy metal head banger. And that final line, "She's buying a

"Stairway to Heaven," I'll spare you, I won't sing it. Now a jury in the United States will have to decide if Led Zeppelin's megahit was a rip-off.

Now in a lawsuit claims the beginning of "Stairway to Heaven" was copied from another band. I want you to take a look at yourself or take a listen

at least.

Such a classic, right, that was "Stairway to Heaven." Now a suit filed by the estate of songwriter for the band Spirit claims Led Zeppelin lifted

that rift from the song "Torse."

[16:50:00] Jeff Peretz is the professor of music theory at New York University. Jeff it does sound really similar. Kind of explain what's

going on there.

JEFF PERETZ, NYU PROFESSOR OF MUSIC THEORY: Well, yes, they sonically similar and they're using the same harmonic structure, the same chord

progression, which is iconic classic chord progression. It's known as a minor line cliche.

NEWTON: Minor line cliche.

PERETZ: -- line cliche. It's a minor chord, the lowest note descends chromatically. It has been used in many, many, many song. "My Funny

Valentine," Rodgers and Hart 1937. Stevie Wonder has used it. The theme song for "Sex and the City" uses the same chord progression.

NEWTON: "Sex and the City" theme song same one. It's landed in court. How and why?

PERETZ: I think because after the blurred lines case, people think that things that sound similar can be tried as being possible infringement.

NEWTON: Ok, now stopping there, let's remind everyone of the blurred lines. That is that song that unfortunately, annoyingly it was in

everybody's head a few years ago.

PERETZ: It was and it sounded a lot like "Got to Give It Up" by Marvin Gaye. The math didn't line up, it's not the same chord progression, it's

not the same melody, it's not the same rhythm, yet a jury found that it was copyright infringement. Probably more because everybody loves Marvin Gaye

and people don't really maybe feel the same way about Robin Thicke.

NEWTON: Really?

PERETZ: I think the hubris of Robin Thicke in the personality contest of it all had a lot to do with it.

NEWTON: OK, but let me take from what you're saying, this is going to go to a jury now, this case of Led Zeppelin. And you're basically trying to

tell me anything can happen.

PERETZ: anything can happen. The math behind it, it is that it is same chord progression, which is not copyrightable. What sounds the same are

the recordings. About the plagiarism case, plagiarism speaks to the actual composition. This is not a copyrightable bit of information. It's a

little harmonic sequence. This are only 12 notes in western music, seven when you're talking about a key. And if there's only seven docs, there's

only but so many rows we can put them in. It's fair game to use them in any order you choose.

NEWTON: what do you think in terms of what's set out there? Do you think Led Zeppelin heard this beforehand?

PERETZ: Possibly, they may have heard it from "My Funny Valentine" from Rodgers and Hart, or "Don't You Worry About a Thing" from Stevie Wonder, or

from "In a Sentimental Mode" for Duke Ellington. It's used so prevalently that possibly they heard it before. It's like the equivalent of me

copyrighting the color red in a painting. If I use red and say no one else can use it because I discovered this color. It's basically a sonic collar.

NEWTON: In terms of the music industry itself, is this going to be kind of a legal fluke, like look, you can say a lot of songs sound alike but that

doesn't mean they end up in court.

PERETZ: That's true. Anybody's guess at this point. After the blurred lines case which, you know, the math didn't line up. It's not the same

song. And it was found to be the same song. Although the reward was reduced and I believe it will be eventually overturned. I would like to

see the jury do the right thing and just throw this one out. Because it really has no merit.

NEWTON: So that's clear where you stand. If you had to deal with ignoramuses like me on the jury, who doesn't know about music. So I'm

sitting there and part of this jury, and you have to show me. I just heard that from myself. What do you say? Clearly you have an opinion. You

saying throw this out.

PERETZ: I think it's up to the judge to properly instruct the jury as to what is copyrightable and what is not copyrightable. The method -- the way

in which the song is presented is not a copyrightable thing. The information that's being used, the melodic art would be. But there's no

melody on top of the spirit song, and the chord progression is the same but that's something traditionally that's not copyrightable. The harmonic

structure, the so same seven chords are there for everybody to use.

NEWTON: If it goes either way, if it's thrown out, do you think it will affect anything going forward? Do you think people will finally stop --?

PERETZ: Not really. I think this is kind of like it's big news today but i don't think it's going to become much. I think the way they snuck it

into court with the re-release of the remastering, that's kind of cute. But I don't think it has any merit and if it is found to be infringement,

it's going to further the gray area and make it a little bit more difficult. You know, when young artists are starting out, if they're not

able to emulate their heroes and to write in different styles then how are they to start? And if this case does set a precedent, then Blind Willie

Jefferson owns every blues that was ever written.

NEWTON: Now I get what you're saying. You're saying in order -- that's the reason you would put to this jury to say look, you couldn't possibly

copyright this.

PERETZ: Correct, if I make a movie and there's two cops, buddy cops, that's a tropes, you know, and so there are many, many movies that have

that same type of ideology behind it. So why can't my song have the same cord progression as another song?

NEWTON: You know, there's been a lot of criticism about the music industry in general. And a lot of people, you can say it, you know, people talk

about the money side of it, people talk about the creative side of it. I mean in general when you see cases like this, does it give you hope in the

music industry or you just think sometimes it's an absolute snake pit?

PERETZ: Well, that's --

NEWTON: We all know it is, yeah.

PERETZ: I think that you know the copyright laws are there to encourage creative and to inspire people to continue to do great work and I think

that suits like this may go against that. You know, that methodology. We want them to be able to write.

[16:55:00] We want them to be able to use the information, to use the pieces of the puzzle that are there to build their own pieces of art. And

if we start restricting that and we start getting litigious around that, it will go against the idea of fair use for creativity.

NEWTON: To use a term, thank heaven you were here to explain. We'll continue to watch this case. And we're having you back when something does


PERETZ: All right, all right. My pleasure.

NEWTON: Still to come, this is Australia's current $5 bill. We'll show you the revamped version that's causing a bit of a stir on social media.

That's right after the break.


NEWTON: Australia's Central Bank unveiled the design for a new $5 bill on Tuesday. You know, they had high hopes for it, but it just didn't go down

too well on social media. With some calling it hideous, and my personal favorite, "visual vomit." Now you take a look for yourself and see what

you think. Here is the original, which we showed you earlier. And it features a picture of Queen Elizabeth II. Right, what could be the problem

with that. This the new design. Queen Elizabeth is still there. She's just a little bit older.

Apparently not enough older for some. But it's all that added color that's causing everyone -- it is kind of strange. You can't even make out what

that is. I want you to take a close look at some of these parodies that have popped up on Twitter. This one features Australian drag performer

Dame Edna in place of the Queen. And just for contrast here's the 2014 winner of the banknote of the year, isn't that pretty, awarded to Trinidad

and Tobago, by the International Bank Note Society.

[17:00:00] Who knew there were these kinds of awards? Let me know what you think of the new Australian $5 bill, and you can tweet me @paulanewtoncnn.

And that's it for this evening edition of QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Paula Newton, Richard will be back here tomorrow.