Assumption; A part of wage-differential

I
In an article in Journal of Economics, Anne Royalty, professor of economics at Stanford University points out the job turnover cannot explain the male-female wage deferential, at least when we consider women who have high-school or higher education. The explanation of job-turnover can only explain part of wage differentials, and that too only in the case of women with lower education.
Women with high-school or higher education are less likely to drop out of work-force for reasons such as settling down with a family, having kids etc. They are in general more individualist, more independent, and have better understanding of the job market. Often such women, instead of having kids around in 23-30 years have babies later in life when they have moved notches higher in the job-ladder. And often they balance the household work and job – husbands often share the household responsibility.
This theory of job-turnover had been around for quite awhile. And this notion that women tend to leave the workforce will definitely be in the back of the head of all the employers. So does this mean that even though a female worker with college education might never intend to leave the workforce whereas employers mistakenly assume that she will, and then offer her a lower earning based solely on such assumption?
II
Another article by Anne Royalty in Industrial and Labor Relations Review, explores the effect of job turnover on the probability of receiving job-training. The male have higher probability of receiving the job training as compared to women, since it is assumed that women will leave the workforce; and the employers acting on the theory of human capital offer job-training to men more than to women.