Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by EsthTrainee)
    That is true, but he's had to resign from the pernament supervisor role and become a fixed term contract trainee under very different terms i.e. we all need to do the same training and have the same supervision, I think its like an apprenticeship. Do you think that makes a difference?
    Might be doing the same job, but they value him more because they know they will wnat to hang onto his skills and experience. Are you both doing TC's? They cna pay what wages they like as long as theres no discrimination on any of the equality grounds.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by jneill)
    It's not uncommon for employment contracts to have such a "gagging" clause in the private sector.
    What does the gagging clause say? Got an example?
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by threeportdrift)
    But the "problem" may just be that the OP doesn't understand the idea of greater experience getting greater reward, the fact that the other person once newly trained, has accelerated utility to the company, so greater value, and that the company valued keeping them in the organisation at a greater sum than an untested direct entrant. But rather than justify that, if it comes up, in a logical way, they hide behind a "no discussion" clause in a contract and disciplinary action if it is discussed. It just all seems very strange to me!
    I don't know if there was such a clause in this particular contract - perhaps there isn't which is why they all know each others salaries. We are surmising...
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by jneill)
    Well take this specific example, the other "trainee" is on a higher pay level because of his particular circumstances, and this situation is a perfectly justifiable action for the employer with that trainee. The other trainees know about his previous history with the employer but the OP still feels agrieved (for some reason).

    In other words, even with justifiable reasons for a pay "inequality" the OP is still unhappy.

    If the salaries had been kept confidential the "problem" wouldn't have arisen...
    That doesnt make any sense. Its more like saying if you never discuss it then nobody will will ever be unhappy.

    Anyway back to the example of this gagging clause.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EsthTrainee)
    Pay discussion is healthy and legal
    Its not always healthy, particuarly if the discussions are not truthful or exageratted. And it might not be illegal but it could break company policies or your terms of your employment contract.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    What does the gagging clause say? Got an example?
    I'll try to dig one out - probably tomorrow...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by threeportdrift)
    I'm very interested to hear more about why this is, how the 'culture' can become a disciplinary issue in some working environments. I ask because I started my career in an organisation where salaries were public knowledge and talking about money/earnings was commonplace. Since then, I've worked in a series of very different organisations and I've noticed this 'say nothing about salaries' culture to different degrees.

    I (slightly) understand the bad taste argument for not discussing salaries, and I understand non-disclosure agreements, terminations etc, but I can't see why, if the people involved want to discuss their salaries, it should be a disciplinary matter. It seems to me to hark back to the 50s mentality about money, and the only reason I can think is because companies don't want workers to work out the inequalities that are hidden in a secret salary structure?
    It can be an issue if the discussions are not truthful. Seen a few examples of the rumour mill going into overdrive and that leading to disgruntled employees. At the same time as there should be an open environment where salaries could be discussed, it is more when people talk about other people's salaries that the issue arises. It is not someone else's business to cause the rumour mill to go into overdrive, disclose or speculate someone else's salary (which sounds like something that could have happened with this post). That is a private matter between the individual employee and the employer and would be deemed a breach of trust.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EsthTrainee)
    Thanks for the answers so far! He is paid 100% more than my wage.....
    Good for him. There may well be circumstances that you are not aware of that made him switch positions - perhaps the company offered this instead of redundancy?

    I'd concentrate on what you're getting. If you think it is not enough, you can always present your case, but DO NOT mention anyone else's salary. Focus on what you do for the (or could for another) company. Under a trainee contract, you may not be in a good negotiating position though.
    • Community Assistant
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J-SP)
    It can be an issue if the discussions are not truthful. Seen a few examples of the rumour mill going into overdrive and that leading to disgruntled employees. At the same time as there should be an open environment where salaries could be discussed, it is more when people talk about other people's salaries that the issue arises. It is not someone else's business to cause the rumour mill to go into overdrive, disclose or speculate someone else's salary (which sounds like something that could have happened with this post).
    I can see why that 'rumour mill' can be damaging to the workplace environment, but it also happens re how much leave some staff are taking, why they are 'off sick' etc. Gossips will be gossips and as a manager you need to step in when it gets out of hand. I still don't see why salary should be something that has a clause saying you can't discuss or might be subject to disciplinary action, other than to protect the company from the disclosure of unfair practices.

    I'm not naturally as suspicious or cynical person, and I'm a relatively senior manager who manages staff at all pay grades. But I find this approach of secrecy re salaries very hard to justify, having worked in an environment where there was no secrecy and no problem either. It just seems odd, but I've taken the thread off track enough. Thanks for all the suggestions!
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by threeportdrift)
    I can see why that 'rumour mill' can be damaging to the workplace environment, but it also happens re how much leave some staff are taking, why they are 'off sick' etc. Gossips will be gossips and as a manager you need to step in when it gets out of hand. I still don't see why salary should be something that has a clause saying you can't discuss or might be subject to disciplinary action, other than to protect the company from the disclosure of unfair practices.

    I'm not naturally as suspicious or cynical person, and I'm a relatively senior manager who manages staff at all pay grades. But I find this approach of secrecy re salaries very hard to justify, having worked in an environment where there was no secrecy and no problem either. It just seems odd, but I've taken the thread off track enough. Thanks for all the suggestions!
    I agree with you - I don't really see the point of them, and I would prefer to be in an environment where it was more transparent. But those type of clauses exist whether rightly or wrongly, and every organisation that does has their reasons for doing so (again whether rightly or wrongly).

    I haven't really seen any terms or conditions in employment contracts though - although I have seen company policies about it.

    As I said, the disciplinary action I have seen is when one individual has spoken about another individual's salary in an open conversation with others, without any actual level of insight/fact/input from the person they were discussing, and the person not even being involved in the conversation. I don't see why you wouldn't disclipine someone for that.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by J-SP)
    It can be an issue if the discussions are not truthful. Seen a few examples of the rumour mill going into overdrive and that leading to disgruntled employees. At the same time as there should be an open environment where salaries could be discussed, it is more when people talk about other people's salaries that the issue arises. It is not someone else's business to cause the rumour mill to go into overdrive, disclose or speculate someone else's salary (which sounds like something that could have happened with this post). That is a private matter between the individual employee and the employer and would be deemed a breach of trust.
    Have you experienced the gagging clauses JNeil is talking about?

    I can see the circumstances where you could cause disquiet or someones privacy might be invaded, but in my experience it goes on just as office gossip, just speculation. Doesnt go anywhere.

    Im surprised at this thread because as far as I knew it trainees all got paid the same. In this situation the person may be doing a TC, but I wouldnt grumble because he has a different value for the firm. I dont really think the OP has a point becayse the person would be the exception. They should be happy they have a TC.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by threeportdrift)
    I can see why that 'rumour mill' can be damaging to the workplace environment, but it also happens re how much leave some staff are taking, why they are 'off sick' etc. Gossips will be gossips and as a manager you need to step in when it gets out of hand. I still don't see why salary should be something that has a clause saying you can't discuss or might be subject to disciplinary action, other than to protect the company from the disclosure of unfair practices.

    I'm not naturally as suspicious or cynical person, and I'm a relatively senior manager who manages staff at all pay grades. But I find this approach of secrecy re salaries very hard to justify, having worked in an environment where there was no secrecy and no problem either. It just seems odd, but I've taken the thread off track enough. Thanks for all the suggestions!
    You hit the nail on the head its about banning gossip, especially when people are bored and they are having after work drinks. It goes with the territory when you are billing and constantly looking at how much revenue you are generating. I dont think its unhealthy to discuss it. I dont think banning works. Funny thing is you can work out roughly what a lot of people might be on in law firms anyway due to lock step. Ive never worried really about whether anyone was on more.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Have you experienced the gagging clauses JNeil is talking about?

    I can see the circumstances where you could cause disquiet or someones privacy might be invaded, but in my experience it goes on just as office gossip, just speculation. Doesnt go anywhere.

    Im surprised at this thread because as far as I knew it trainees all got paid the same. In this situation the person may be doing a TC, but I wouldnt grumble because he has a different value for the firm. I dont really think the OP has a point becayse the person would be the exception. They should be happy they have a TC.
    I have seen it get pretty nasty - not everyone is nice and even when someone is picked up on it informally, it hasn't necessarily stopped them from continuing and therefore they needed a more formal warning.

    Haven't got the clauses to hand - either haven't seen them or couldn't remember them (created enough employment contracts, but the T&Cs were all the same, exceptionally long and never needed checking, so wouldn't have had to be completely clued up as to whether there was a term on this particular issue or not). They exist though - although its questionable as to whether they are enforceable when someone discloses their own salary.

    This is not about trainees - it is about apprenticeships, so it isn't technically a TC. As apprenticeship wages are tied to age (under 19 vs over 19) there is quite a legitimate cause for the employer to pay the individual more, even without the lack of service.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    You hit the nail on the head its about banning gossip, especially when people are bored and they are having after work drinks. It goes with the territory when you are billing and constantly looking at how much revenue you are generating. I dont think its unhealthy to discuss it. I dont think banning works. Funny thing is you can work out roughly what a lot of people might be on in law firms anyway due to lock step. Ive never worried really about whether anyone was on more.
    Its usually the performance related bonuses that cause the problems!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.