I know of no instance (and would be interested if someone could provide an example to the contrary) where a man and a woman doing the same work for the same number of hours get paid differently.
Of course if the woman is working part-time and the man full-time then he's bound to get paid more - but that's because he's working longer hours not because he's male.
If the man's an electrical engineer and the woman's making sandwiches then of course he'll get paid more - that's because being an electrical engineer is more difficult, therefore fewer people are capable of doing it, therefore there is scarcity and that pushes up the price you can charge.
It's disappointing to see this very familiar piece of fraudulent agitprop ("60% of male earnings") still circulating. But then I suppose that's because, to judge by many of these reviews, it still works and still creates 'politically useful' feelings of resentment and frustration.