The Gender Pay Gap- total and complete *******s

[Peter]

Apparently women at my company earn 11% less than men.

Now.... there are around 2500 employees of whom everyone apart from the executive (around 30 people) are paid on a grade and a scale. Everyone is appointed to the grade for their job and the scale depends entirely on salary of your previous post.

In other words, 2470 people are paid exactly the same as their counterparts and it is not possible for gender to be an issue in Agreeing the scale.

Within the executive, of 30 people, around25 of these are women. There are hardly any men apart from the CEO.

The only possible explanation is that women hold a higher proportion of the lower paying jobs. within those roles they are paid precisely the same as the men.

THere are two solutions- either pay women more than men for doing the same job or stop employing women in the lower paid jobs. I wonder which way we will go :)

[7sisters]

Apparently women at my company earn 11% less than men.

Now.... there are around 2500 employees of whom everyone apart from the executive (around 30 people) are paid on a grade and a scale. Everyone is appointed to the grade for their job and the scale depends entirely on salary of your previous post.

In other words, 2470 people are paid exactly the same as their counterparts and it is not possible for gender to be an issue in Agreeing the scale.

Within the executive, of 30 people, around25 of these are women. There are hardly any men apart from the CEO.

The only possible explanation is that women hold a higher proportion of the lower paying jobs. within those roles they are paid precisely the same as the men.

THere are two solutions- either pay women more than men for doing the same job or stop employing women in the lower paid jobs. I wonder which way we will go :)

I was quite shocked to discover there was a gender pay gap. Surely a company advertise a post at a designated remuneration and people from either sex apply. :shrug:

[eastgermanautos]

Apparently women at my company earn 11% less than men.

Now.... there are around 2500 employees of whom everyone apart from the executive (around 30 people) are paid on a grade and a scale. Everyone is appointed to the grade for their job and the scale depends entirely on salary of your previous post.

In other words, 2470 people are paid exactly the same as their counterparts and it is not possible for gender to be an issue in Agreeing the scale.

Within the executive, of 30 people, around25 of these are women. There are hardly any men apart from the CEO.

The only possible explanation is that women hold a higher proportion of the lower paying jobs. within those roles they are paid precisely the same as the men.

THere are two solutions- either pay women more than men for doing the same job or stop employing women in the lower paid jobs. I wonder which way we will go :)

Whatever d!ck.

You've never been to Indiana, so you don't have any fvcking clue what it's like to be shat upon as a woman.

[eastgermanautos]

Whatever d!ck.

You've never been to Indiana, so you don't have any fvcking clue what it's like to be shat upon as a woman.

Okay, neither do I, but still. :-D

[Peter]

Whatever d!ck.

You've never been to Indiana, so you don't have any fvcking clue what it's like to be shat upon as a woman.

Your sexual practices are entirely your own affair. You are correct, we don't go in for that sort of thing over here :)

[Monty92]

Apparently women at my company earn 11% less than men.

Now.... there are around 2500 employees of whom everyone apart from the executive (around 30 people) are paid on a grade and a scale. Everyone is appointed to the grade for their job and the scale depends entirely on salary of your previous post.

In other words, 2470 people are paid exactly the same as their counterparts and it is not possible for gender to be an issue in Agreeing the scale.

Within the executive, of 30 people, around25 of these are women. There are hardly any men apart from the CEO.

The only possible explanation is that women hold a higher proportion of the lower paying jobs. within those roles they are paid precisely the same as the men.

THere are two solutions- either pay women more than men for doing the same job or stop employing women in the lower paid jobs. I wonder which way we will go :)

But what of conscious and unconscious bias that leads to women being overlooked for appointments and promotions?

What of inflexible working that makes it hard for women to have a family and maintain a career?

What of the large numbers of women who report feeling discriminated against in the workplace for having a baby?

What of the entrenched patriarchal norms that mean only 1% of men have bothered taking advantage of new shared parental leave?

What of women being reluctant to take on lucrative nighttime shift-work due to legitimate fears about their safety?

What of society's continued under-appreciation of essential but low-paid 'caring' jobs that are disproportionately made up of a female workforce (because of gender norms)?

[Peter]

But what of conscious and unconscious bias that leads to women being overlooked for appointments and promotions?

What of inflexible working that makes it hard for women to have a family and maintain a career?

What of the large numbers of women who report feeling discriminated against in the workplace for having a baby?

What of the entrenched patriarchal norms that mean only 1% of men have bothered taking advantage of new shared parental leave?

What of women being reluctant to take on lucrative nighttime shift-work due to legitimate fears about their safety?

What of society's continued under-appreciation of essential but low-paid 'caring' jobs that are disproportionately made up of a female workforce (because of gender norms)?

All *******s, in the main. THe promotions and appointments argument falls flat on its face where I work. 8 out of ten internal promotions are women and we have entire departments that havent hired a man in five years. THey make up 75% of our Corporate Management Team.

When they want to start a family they get a year off, full pay, and even accrueannual ****ing leave whilst on maternity leave! When they finally comeback they get whatever they want in terms of flexible working/working from home etc. Trust me, when a woman wants to start a family the first thing she does is get herself a job here. THey are also immune from the sack or redundancy whilst on maternity leave.

Of course, they all complain about discrimination but its rubbish. Not a single case you could point to here.

There could potentially be an issue with the grading of some of the lowest paid jobs, where secretarial work is graded lower than unskilled manual work despite both requiring similar levels of skills and knowledge.

THey use the 'legitimate fears' argument to get out of working evenings, weekends, going overseas. Blokes have to do all of this.

[Monty92]

All *******s, in the main. THe promotions and appointments argument falls flat on its face where I work. 8 out of ten internal promotions are women and we have entire departments that havent hired a man in five years. THey make up 75% of our Corporate Management Team.

When they want to start a family they get a year off, full pay, and even accrueannual ****ing leave whilst on maternity leave! When they finally comeback they get whatever they want in terms of flexible working/working from home etc. Trust me, when a woman wants to start a family the first thing she does is get herself a job here. THey are also immune from the sack or redundancy whilst on maternity leave.

Of course, they all complain about discrimination but its rubbish. Not a single case you could point to here.

There could potentially be an issue with the grading of some of the lowest paid jobs, where secretarial work is graded lower than unskilled manual work despite both requiring similar levels of skills and knowledge.

THey use the 'legitimate fears' argument to get out of working evenings, weekends, going overseas. Blokes have to do all of this.

Sounds like you work for a great company, which accounts for its (comparatively) small gender pay gap.

A little more work to do to reach full equity, but certainly cause for optimism.

wd your bosses, imo.

[7sisters]

Sounds like you work for a great company, which accounts for its (comparatively) small gender pay gap.

A little more work to do to reach full equity, but certainly cause for optimism.

wd your bosses, imo.

It also sounds like it's either ..a. in the public sector.. b.. a very large and profitable organisation.
Trust me on this. No SME could even begin to factor in those kinds of benefits and remain afloat.

[World's End Stella]

It also sounds like it's either ..a. in the public sector.. b.. a very large and profitable organisation.
Trust me on this. No SME could even begin to factor in those kinds of benefits and remain afloat.

It's the former. Which is probably why the public sector attracts work shy, unambitious, presumptuous, left wing champagne socialists who drain the public funds while providing limited value to society as a whole.*

*Not that Peter is anything like this, of course. :-)

[Peter]

It's the former. Which is probably why the public sector attracts work shy, unambitious, presumptuous, left wing champagne socialists who drain the public funds while providing limited value to society as a whole.*

*Not that Peter is anything like this, of course. :-)

Me? Certainly not. I don't particularly care for champagne.

[Burney]

But what of conscious and unconscious bias that leads to women being overlooked for appointments and promotions?

What of inflexible working that makes it hard for women to have a family and maintain a career?

What of the large numbers of women who report feeling discriminated against in the workplace for having a baby?

What of the entrenched patriarchal norms that mean only 1% of men have bothered taking advantage of new shared parental leave?

What of women being reluctant to take on lucrative nighttime shift-work due to legitimate fears about their safety?

What of society's continued under-appreciation of essential but low-paid 'caring' jobs that are disproportionately made up of a female workforce (because of gender norms)?

This made me laugh

903

[SWv2]

It's all bóllocks.

See also the outrage at Facebook for doing whatever they did with people's data.

Also all this #metoo nonsense.

Bóllocks the lot of it.

[Peter]

It's all bóllocks.

See also the outrage at Facebook for doing whatever they did with people's data.

Also all this #metoo nonsense.

Bóllocks the lot of it.

Well, quite :)

[Alberto Balsam Rodriguez]

Apparently women at my company earn 11% less than men.

Now.... there are around 2500 employees of whom everyone apart from the executive (around 30 people) are paid on a grade and a scale. Everyone is appointed to the grade for their job and the scale depends entirely on salary of your previous post.

In other words, 2470 people are paid exactly the same as their counterparts and it is not possible for gender to be an issue in Agreeing the scale.

Within the executive, of 30 people, around25 of these are women. There are hardly any men apart from the CEO.

The only possible explanation is that women hold a higher proportion of the lower paying jobs. within those roles they are paid precisely the same as the men.

THere are two solutions- either pay women more than men for doing the same job or stop employing women in the lower paid jobs. I wonder which way we will go :)


At my company...it is close to 35%

We just appointed our first ever female head of department towards the end of last year.