The Student Room Group

Essex University gives female staff one-off pay rises in order to close gender pay ga

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/essex-university-gives-female-staff-one-off-pay-rises-to-close-gender-pay-gap-a7063446.html

Very worrying times indeed.

Women being paid more because they're women and there's a "gap" - not based on merit and work.

"Female staff in higher education earn an average of more than £6,000 less than their male counterparts"

AN AVERAGE for **** sakes.

Scroll to see replies

Original post by The Roast
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/essex-university-gives-female-staff-one-off-pay-rises-to-close-gender-pay-gap-a7063446.html

Very worrying times indeed.

Women being paid more because they're women and there's a "gap" - not based on merit and work.

"Female staff in higher education earn an average of more than £6,000 less than their male counterparts"

AN AVERAGE for **** sakes.


They are being paid more to close the gap in salaries because the female professors are being paid less for doing equivalent work. Why would you be against that? If they dont close it, then they will be sued, so seems perfectly sensible to me.
Reply 2
Avatar for The Roast
The Roast
OP
2
Original post by 999tigger
They are being paid more to close the gap in salaries because the female professors are being paid less for doing equivalent work. Why would you be against that? If they dont close it, then they will be sued, so seems perfectly sensible to me.


According to (https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/equal-pay), "Equal pay means that men and women in the same employment performing equal work must receive equal rewards. Find out more about the equal pay laws and how to verify, implement and maintain equal pay in your organisation."


Do you really think the UoE were intentionally paying women less than men? If so then hundreds and hundreds of companies should be sued - but they're not.



According to the same website "Equal pay and the gender pay gap are not the same thing. The gender pay gap is the difference between men’s and women’s average earnings. You can read more about this here. "

The Gender Pay Gap itself has been disproved countless times:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/04/12/dont-buy-into-the-gender-pay-gap-myth/#2db4967a4766


"The official Bureau of Labor Department statistics show that the median earnings of full-time female workers is 77 percent of the median earnings of full-time male workers. But that is very different than “77 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.” The latter gives the impression that a man and a woman standing next to each other doing the same job for the same number of hours get paid different salaries. That’s not at all the case. “Full time” officially means 35 hours, but men work more hours than women. That’s the first problem: We could be comparing men working 40 hours to women working 35."
(edited 7 years ago)
Feminism was meant to be about balancing the scales so both genders could benefit.

Now it increasingly looks like it is trying to rebalance the scales in favour of females. Which i do have a problem with.

Men and Women are equal but opposite, and should be viewed as such, they should be treated equally and paid the same wage.

However in this case it has not happened, due to faulty feminist info (something which there is a LOT of nowadays) the Uni has been conned into paying more to its female cohort than its male cohort. So as an Egalitarian and i imagine many other Egalitarians have let out a collective sigh. It's a shame as a few years ago i would have said i was a feminist, but it has just become far too toxic, my close friend, a male joined the feminist society in Exeter and got berated and belittled for being a male, even by his fellow 'gender-neutral' males. Luckily the head of the FemSoc there dealt with those who belittled him. But is this the kind of society we want our children to be in?

I mean just the other day there was a discussion about having an international mens day, now i for one wasn't really that keen on it, much rather wanted to turn international womens day into international men+women day. However someone said: "Having an international mens day might be too contraversial, how about an international non-white mens day?" The way we have come to perceive certain people as being contraversial or over-priviliged is INSANE. Especially for those who are white, male and working/middle-class. If you're those three things then you're cursed in the eyes of the many young in modern society.

Best regards
Francis.
Did I miss it or did the report explain how women ended up "earning" less?
Reply 5
Avatar for The Roast
The Roast
OP
2
Original post by caravaggio2
Did I miss it or did the report explain how women ended up "earning" less?


You know what, I don't they have - beside claims it's because they're women.
Original post by The Roast


Do you really think the UoE were intentionally paying women less than men? If so then hundreds and hundreds of companies should be sued - but they're not.

According to the same website "Equal pay and the gender pay gap are not the same thing. The gender pay gap is the difference between men’s and women’s average earnings. You can read more about this here. "
"


You might what to read the article you posted.
It isnt about intentionally paying less, although that does happen. Its about historical differences when it was felt acceptable for paying women less for doing similar jobs.

Hundreds of companies have been sued. The more significant ones make the news.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-20294633
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/14374561.Thousands_in_line_for_share_of_up_to___100_million_in_pay_dispute/
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14378554.3_000_female_workers_to_benefit_as_NHS_Scotland_equal_pay_claims_settled/

This is about exmaining the gender gap and understanding why it exists. In the case of equal pay for the same work, then such a gap is cause for investigation and if there is a disparity then it needs to be assessed as to why it exists and whether it is illegal under the Equalities Act.

The Uni looked at the situation across uts workforce and found the gap existed fro no good reason in the case of employed professors, hence thier move.
They did not find an issue in any of the other areas. the pay rjise was more to do with perceived inequality and not just because there was a pay gap, much as you like to push it.

Vice-chancellor Anthony Forster said "Treating our staff with equal respect and dignity is at the very core of our values as a diverse and inclusive community.
"This decision ensures we reward people in a fair way, based upon their contribution to our community, regardless of their personal characteristics."

I cnat see the problem you have with treating women equally, ignoring gender and looking at contribution and ensuring they get paid the same money for doing the same work.
Sorry to be dim but I still don't see an explanation.
So is it that more men teach chemistry and more women teach womens studies for example.
or do more women work part time or
women teaching 35 hrs chemistry have been getting payed less than men teaching 35 hrs of chemistry?
Have men been getting bonuses that women didn't?
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 8
Avatar for simon_g
simon_g
16
Original post by 999tigger
They are being paid more to close the gap in salaries because the female professors are being paid less for doing equivalent work. Why would you be against that? If they dont close it, then they will be sued, so seems perfectly sensible to me.


if the females professors (or females in general) were being paid less- for doing equivalent work- why are men still widely employed? surely, it would make much more economical sense to employ "cheaper" women...

or, maybe- and i know that idea may seems like a heresy- women don't do (by average) the same job as men, and therefore they are paid less?
Equivalent work or work of equal value is the latest way for feminists to get around the fact they are being called out on the ******** of paid 77% for exactlyi the same work, which it never is.
Either way there is nothing to stop them doing exactly the same job

I'm just curious why they arent specifying why the females in this uni are paid less. The inference being it is plain sexism.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by simon_g
if the females professors (or females in general) were being paid less- for doing equivalent work- why are men still widely employed? surely, it would make much more economical sense to employ "cheaper" women...

or, maybe- and i know that idea may seems like a heresy- women don't do (by average) the same job as men, and therefore they are paid less?


You assume there are equivalent women to take their place.

Where the work is equal, then they should get equal pay. Theres the Equality Act 2010, which deals with this and a statutory code which explains how this are put into practice.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/equalpaycode.pdf

If they werent doing equal work , then they wouldnt qualify for equal pay, hence in the article you will see they only found it relevant for the professors.

Equal pay for equal workWomen (or men) can claim equal pay with colleagues of the opposite sex where they are in the same employment and doing:

•

Work which is the same or broadly similar (known as ‘like work’)

•

Work rated as equivalent under an analytical job evaluation scheme ( known as ‘work rated as equivalent’), or

•

Work which is different but which is of equal value in terms of the demands is makes on the jobholders (known as ‘work of equal value’).



http://www.equalpayportal.co.uk/the-law/
Original post by Mathemagicien
I think I wrote that :rofl:


Yeah haha it was you! I couldn't tell if it was sarcasm or not! If it was then it was masterful as it flew over my head! If not then read on haha! :P

Best regards to you Math!
Francis
So the answer to stopping gender inequality... is by being unequal...? Great solution, guys. No.



Original post by Nidhoggr
Speaking of women's issues there's an ad with Alison Brie on that page and her tits look incredible :biggrin:


And this is why people still think feminism is necessary. Women do not exist for you to sexualise and objectify them. If a woman is behaving in a way that is intending to be sexual, or is sexualising herself, then your comments may be appropriate. Women should be able to dress and look the way they please without feeling as though a bunch of perverted men are raping them with their eyes. Get some self control and some respect.
Original post by Nidhoggr
Speaking of women's issues there's an ad with Alison Brie on that page and her tits look incredible :biggrin:


Lol
Keep it in your head. Not everyone needs to know
The male staff should sue the university, I would if I worked there.
Original post by ivybridge
So the answer to stopping gender inequality... is by being unequal...? Great solution, guys. No.


Women should be able to dress and look the way they please without feeling as though a bunch of perverted men are raping them with their eyes.


Oh ffs come on man it's pretty poor form to trivialize a word like rape and use it like that. He should have kept the thought to himself but there isn't anything inherently wrong with a man looking at a women who's body is sexually attractive and feeling attraction/lust towards it. Just as there's nothing wrong with a guy who's wearing a tight vest top showing off his muscles having girls turn heads and think the same.
Does anyone see how stupid this is?

The UNIVERSITY pays its staff, it decides who gets what, it's down to them.
Original post by 999tigger
They are being paid more to close the gap in salaries because the female professors are being paid less for doing equivalent work.


Citation needed?
Original post by joey11223
Oh ffs come on man it's pretty poor form to trivialize a word like rape and use it like that. He should have kept the thought to himself but there isn't anything inherently wrong with a man looking at a women who's body is sexually attractive and feeling attraction/lust towards it. Just as there's nothing wrong with a guy who's wearing a tight vest top showing off his muscles having girls turn heads and think the same.


You are missing the point because that isn't what I'm saying and I didn't trivialise 'rape' - it's a commonly used phrase in such situations.
Original post by The Roast

Do you really think the UoE were intentionally paying women less than men? If so then hundreds and hundreds of companies should be sued - but they're not.



Lots of public sector organisations have been sued for this and there has been a massive catch up exercise.

The way it happened is that in the early days of pay equality in the 1970s, organisations made up ways to preserve existing pay differentials. One way of doing that was to create a lot of senior posts where there were a lot of men and create a lot of junior posts where there were a lot of women. Often the numbers in each grade simply replicated the existing discriminatory salary structure and therefore embedded it.

Differentials were then much more important in pay bargaining because of high inflation. With prices going up by 20% a year, headline pay was not a reliable indicator of earnings. Hence employees and their unions strove to ensure that one group continued to be ahead of a another group by a similar margin.

So if you look at the English faculty and the physics faculty, does Essex have a lot of full professorship posts in the the physics faculty and lots of junior lectureship posts in the English faculty?

You pay each full professor the same salary regardless of faculty and gender and you pay each junior lecturer the same salary regardless of faculty and gender, but the plain fact is there will be many more men earning more than women because a woman is more likely to be in a junior grade than in a senior one.
(edited 7 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you