Has anyone elses salary been affected by the gender pay gap yet?

Scam said:
Surely if they've bumped up all lower grade staff they've not actually done anything about the gender pay gap as the men there will have received the same bump? I'm sure a resident mathematician can tell us..
Click to expand...
because the vast amount of women give birth and take a career break, on average they end in lower end jobs, ao spuhing up the pay for those jobs will close the gap a bit, butdoesn'tt solve the underlying issue of far more women take time off work for kids, than do men.
 
My company has a female MD, 50:50 m/f split of directors overall but two thirds of other staff are women (both senior and support staff). Yet when I suggested to the MD at our Christmas lunch that they go on a male only hiring spree I got laughed at. Funny that..
 
Skillmister said:
My company has a female MD, 50:50 m/f split of directors overall but two thirds of other staff are women (both senior and support staff). Yet when I suggested to the MD at our Christmas lunch that they go on a male only hiring spree I got laughed at. Funny that..
Click to expand...

It only works one way. Nearly 80% female and their issue is men doing harder jobs earn more money
 
LeMson said:
If you have this in writing go see a lawyer, sounds like sexual discrimination that your rise is below that of the womens.
Click to expand...
Not really, seen as the OP said all staff on the lower grades got a bigger bump. However the fact they said it was to do with the gender pay gap, hmn...
 
LeMson said:
If you have this in writing go see a lawyer, sounds like sexual discrimination that your rise is below that of the womens.
Click to expand...

It probably isn't - HR will have likely considered that, there will be some men among the low paid workers who got the 10% rise too, they're just giving the rise to a specific group of low paid of workers that are predominantly women (but not exclusively) in order to partly address what they see as a gender pay gap - I doubt you could sue over it.

You could however demand more money/go get another job offer (you should be doing this anyway OP if you're underpaid).
 
Bit confused, if male A and female A in same job grade do the same amount of work to a satisfactory level each (With in normal person to person tolerances) why is female 1 paid less. I though in this day and age this wasn't allowed under the law???

Fizz me I thought we had moved on from this crap these days. My work place has no difference in wages based on sex of the worker, real shame this kind of stuff is still going on.
 
Defiant306 said:
Bit confused, if male A and female A in same job grade do the same amount of work to a satisfactory level each (With in normal person to person tolerances) why is female 1 paid less. I though in this day and age this wasn't allowed under the law???

Fizz me I thought we had moved on from this crap these days. My work place has no difference in wages based on sex of the worker, real shame this kind of stuff is still going on.
Click to expand...
Generally they aren't. The issue is that the type of job that women do often attracts a lower wage than the type of job a man does. But they are different roles.
 
If its simply role based and the pay is the same for each gender then there is no issue around gender pay, there is though issues around the fact that low and middle classes have not had a proper wage raise in about 30 years since any raise has only been to cover the cost of inflation and in the last 10 years a lot of us haven't even had that, myself included.

There is only one way to get more money and that's to fight it out for higher jobs and that's what the elite want, us fighting each other than focusing on the true crap going on in this country/world. No wonder folks are despondent these days in work and the new generations are choosing to value other things in life over money and power, but this being said I'm already eyeing up the coming automation, AI and robotics changes to society. I think anyone with at least 20 years left working needs to get ready for this, we live in interesting times folks!
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
What my company has done to address this is give a > 10% pay rise to the lower grade staff to bump the average female hourly rate up. They have literally stated this is the reason they are doing it. This obviously means people above the lowest grade, including myself, get a much smaller pay rise, despite us being in a more demanding role with greater responsibility.
Click to expand...
Your conclusion doesn’t follow unless your company had decided that it was going to spend £X more this year on payroll than last year and then went on to decide it should be used to address the pay gap.

What was your % pay rise last year? If it was also at or just below inflation, you really have no justification for thinking that you have been screwed this year because a significant pay increase for your role was never on the cards.
 
dowie said:
It probably isn't - HR will have likely considered that, there will be some men among the low paid workers who got the 10% rise too, they're just giving the rise to a specific group of low paid of workers that are predominantly women (but not exclusively) in order to partly address what they see as a gender pay gap - I doubt you could sue over it.

You could however demand more money/go get another job offer (you should be doing this anyway OP if you're underpaid).
Click to expand...
Ow I read it was for the women, if it's just for the lowest paid then yes not sexist, unless they are all women. Just find a new job OP if you are paid below market rate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom