Historically women have been paid less than men for the same work. Of course no reasonable person would argue this was justifiable. It is rightly against the law and has been since The Equal Pay Act 1970. In all my working life I have never come across unequal pay based on gender or for that mater any other type of discrimination - ie same grade - same pay - regardless.
As a consequence I was of the view men and women are paid equally in the UK - the battle had been won.
However the term "gender pay gap" has been regularly featuring in the news media. Like many people I think - I have been rather dismissive of it - viewing the simple headlines as an exaggeration. I do not believe men and women are paid differently for the same job in the UK - and I stand by that. (of course there may still be some dark ages employers who are breaking the law). So my standpoint has been - any statistics that say a gender pay gap exists are biased to promote a particular feminist cause - and any consequent lazy headline - to sell tabloid newspapers!
Subsequently of course I take the trouble to understand the "gender pay gap" is not revealing that women are paid less than men for doing the same job - but that in any given company the total earnt by the average male employee is typically greater than that earnt by the average female employee. This of course puts a whole new slant and significance on the statistics - on "the gender pay gap" (as now understood!).
At this point I commend you to go to the link below. It is Kate Andrews - Associate Director of the Institute of Economic Affairs.
Here's
on why the 'Gender Pay Gap' reporting measures are worse than useless, and why women should be working to reclaim the better side of feminism, rooted in fairness, equality and truth!
https://twitter.com/iealondon/status/1055564925807091712?s=17
Like Kate I think the way the gender pay gap statistics have typically been used (as lurid and misleading headlines) has undermined their value - undermined the fair and reasonable objective of treating everyone fairly when it comes to pay.
Once you get over the irksome misimpression/lie that women are typically paid less for the same work (in the UK) than men you can move on to something more meaningful.
Undoubtedly in most companies the average male pay is greater than the average female pay. (although it is fair to say the gap is closing). Why does a gap exist? Is there a gender bias? Are women being treated unfairly? How can it happen when we have an Equal Pay Act?
It is these questions I want to focus on now - I don't know the answers. I want to know/consider them (and campaign for changes if there is a problem) - not least because I have a daughter and two little granddaughters. I want them to be able to be anything they want to be - I want them to have an equal chance - be treated fairly and on their merit.
So question - why in a typical company is average male pay greater than average female pay?
It could be because ( I have fired off a few reasons from the top of my head!) :
As a consequence I was of the view men and women are paid equally in the UK - the battle had been won.
However the term "gender pay gap" has been regularly featuring in the news media. Like many people I think - I have been rather dismissive of it - viewing the simple headlines as an exaggeration. I do not believe men and women are paid differently for the same job in the UK - and I stand by that. (of course there may still be some dark ages employers who are breaking the law). So my standpoint has been - any statistics that say a gender pay gap exists are biased to promote a particular feminist cause - and any consequent lazy headline - to sell tabloid newspapers!
Subsequently of course I take the trouble to understand the "gender pay gap" is not revealing that women are paid less than men for doing the same job - but that in any given company the total earnt by the average male employee is typically greater than that earnt by the average female employee. This of course puts a whole new slant and significance on the statistics - on "the gender pay gap" (as now understood!).
At this point I commend you to go to the link below. It is Kate Andrews - Associate Director of the Institute of Economic Affairs.
Here's
on why the 'Gender Pay Gap' reporting measures are worse than useless, and why women should be working to reclaim the better side of feminism, rooted in fairness, equality and truth!
https://twitter.com/iealondon/status/1055564925807091712?s=17
Like Kate I think the way the gender pay gap statistics have typically been used (as lurid and misleading headlines) has undermined their value - undermined the fair and reasonable objective of treating everyone fairly when it comes to pay.
Once you get over the irksome misimpression/lie that women are typically paid less for the same work (in the UK) than men you can move on to something more meaningful.
Undoubtedly in most companies the average male pay is greater than the average female pay. (although it is fair to say the gap is closing). Why does a gap exist? Is there a gender bias? Are women being treated unfairly? How can it happen when we have an Equal Pay Act?
It is these questions I want to focus on now - I don't know the answers. I want to know/consider them (and campaign for changes if there is a problem) - not least because I have a daughter and two little granddaughters. I want them to be able to be anything they want to be - I want them to have an equal chance - be treated fairly and on their merit.
So question - why in a typical company is average male pay greater than average female pay?
It could be because ( I have fired off a few reasons from the top of my head!) :
- When it comes to promotion men are better qualified. It is widely understood that on average young women coming out of education have a higher standard of examination passes than average young men. I do not think anyone would seriously argue men are more intelligent.
- It could be men are more ambitious. There might be something in this perhaps. I don't know the answer. Is there still some sort of hangover - the man is the breadwinner - a woman's career is not so important. Whose attitudes need to change here?
- It could be men are more competitive. This has been suggested as a significant contributory factor in as much as men might push themselves forward more readily - to ask for promotion - to ask for more pay. Whose attitude needs to change here?
- It could be at job selection there is a bias in favour of men. It is likely this still exists. The Equal Opportunities Act and other employment law offers protection but how effective this is in reality I am not sure?
- It could be promotions are based on subjective rather than objective criteria. It is likely - almost certain this happens - probably happens widely. Good employment/recruitment practices should outline the assessment criteria and be subject to legal claim for unfair treatment. How effective this is I do not know.
- It could be because women have children. Commonsense tells me this is a massive factor. I am sure many small scale employers or department managers take the likely prospect of maternity leave in to account when offering jobs. Commonsense too tells you that many women's careers - their CPD - is interrupted by pregnancy. Men get ahead? Having children may also affect ambition - may affect commitment - may affect the ability to work. There is an honest discussion to be had here although often it is a polarised debate. Some would argue pregnancy is a female issue and it is disingenuous to deny its inevitable and practical impact on work and career. Others argue in modern employment practices companies must discount pregnancy as any sort of negative factor and do everything possible to negate its impact by way of legal requirement. Are women still forced to choose between career and children? Is this inevitable?
- It could be because women do not apply for certain jobs. It seems this is still a factor although there are few taboos left. The SAS now recruit women. However it surely is the case that young girls are channelled towards certain types of occupations and away from others. Is that unreasonable? Whose fault is it? What needs to change?
- It could be qualification requirements for a particular role are specific and there are not enough women that hold those qualifications. This is tied in with the point above. Are female students directed towards certain academic subjects and away from others? Is there a gender difference in disposition/capacity towards certain academic subjects? Easyjet find it difficult to find and train female pilots. Whose fault? What needs to change?
- It could be men are better suited to particular jobs and those jobs are paid more. Undoubtedly this is a factor. For instance heavy dirty jobs might be paid more. These jobs might be judged more suitable for men. Job Evaluation is a recognised process. Currently Tesco are being sued by shop floor workers (predominantly women) who claim they are paid less (unfairly so) than the companies warehouse staff. (predominantly men). My own view here is largely to do with supply and demand.
WHAT CAN BE DONE TO NARROW THE GAP?
From 6 April 2017 employers in Great Britain with more than 250 staff are required by law to publish the following four types of figures annually on their own website and on a government website:
- Gender pay gap (mean and median averages)
- Gender bonus gap (mean and median averages)
- Proportion of men and women receiving bonuses
- Proportion of men and women in each quartile of the organisation’s pay structure
This information is valuable. It does put pressure on companies to justify their gender pay differences. However to be credible it must be used well and I am sure to date there are plenty of examples where that has not been the case. Analysis of the factors behind the figures is vital because without accurate and objective analysis little will change.
POSITIVE DESCRIMINATION - AND ALL WOMEN SHORTLISTS - it is argued this is a sensible and practical solution to change a culture. Some women argue it is patronising. Hayley Turner the accomplished flat race jockey poured scorn on the idea of giving women jockeys a weight carrying advantage to help more women get rides. She said she wanted to get her rides on merit not for a gender reason.
POSITIVE DESCRIMINATION - AND ALL WOMEN SHORTLISTS - it is argued this is a sensible and practical solution to change a culture. Some women argue it is patronising. Hayley Turner the accomplished flat race jockey poured scorn on the idea of giving women jockeys a weight carrying advantage to help more women get rides. She said she wanted to get her rides on merit not for a gender reason.
I am sure the vast majority believe in gender equality and want to create a fair society if it does not exist. However there is a feminist movement that at its extremes blame any evidence of gender inequality on men conspiring to keep women in their place. It is easy to point to male dominated boardrooms. There is no doubt systemic problems exist - there is no doubt - some chauvinism. This needs to change. I am going to argue however that there are women who perpetuate a victim mentality and I would suggest to them that work in a capitalist system at its core is based on meritocracy, profit motive and supply and demand. Women like men must compete on that basis. The key is for society to establish a level playing field. I remain unsure how pregnancy and physical difference between men and women should be dealt with in this respect.
No comments:
Post a Comment