Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

It's illegal to pay a man and a woman 2 different rates of pay for the same job watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I know there's a lot of threads on feminism and the gender pay gap already, but I think we need to end this debate once and for all. Because the nonsense that is spouted by feminists on this subject makes me cringe.

    Two workers. 1 male, 1 female. Both are working exactly the same job. They are paid the same rate (per hour). If they work the same number of hours, they receive the same annual wage. It is illegal to pay one more than the other.

    I saw the news story yesterday about Tescos. Women were claiming that it's unfair for men in the warehouse to be paid ~£3/hour more than women stacking the shelves on the supermarket floor.

    These are two different jobs, therefore the company has every right to have 2 different rates of pay. Yes there is some overlap in terms of skill set - but the warehouse job clearly requires more skill. The technical skills (such as operating a forklift truck) are vastly more complicated than putting a few loaves of bread onto a shelf. The warehouse itself is a hazardous environment, so it's right that they are paid a premium for this reason alone.

    To me, I see no issue - the more skilled job (warehouse) is paid more than the less skilled job (shop floor stacking)

    This is not a gender pay gap argument. This is an argument that one job is of equal skill level to a different job. There happens to be more men working in the warehouse, but this is totally irrelevant.

    This also comes after the BBC editor Carrie Gracie was arguing that she should be paid the same as her male colleagues. Her males colleagues who happen to do a different job. This isn't a gender pay gap argument, this is again an argument that one job is of equal skill to a different job. It just so happens the male is in the higher skilled job (or at least what the BBC deems is higher skilled and more valued job), but again this is totally irrelevant.


    So feminists - please tell me what I'm missing here? Women and men who do the same job, and work the same hours, are paid exactly the same. Women apparently earn "less" due to a variety of reasons, including:

    - women choose to do lower skilled jobs
    - women are more likely to work part time
    - women take time off for maternity leave
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    100% agree with this post. But I'm following to see the possible arguments people will come up with
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    Community Assistant
    I agree with you. Different jobs have different pay. The same job has the same pay. I get paid the same as my male colleagues who are shop assistants like me. I don't get paid, and don't expect to get paid, the same as my male colleagues who are team leaders, because they do a different job.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    There’s so much more to pay than the job though. Experience plays a huge role. The more experienced you are, the more you are paid. Simples.

    I agree with your overall point, for example do people really think a boss will interview a man and a woman for a job (the same job) and then offer the man 22,000 pa and the woman 20,000 per annum? Of course not?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snowman77)
    I know there's a lot of threads on feminism and the gender pay gap already, but I think we need to end this debate once and for all. Because the nonsense that is spouted by feminists on this subject makes me cringe.

    Two workers. 1 male, 1 female. Both are working exactly the same job. They are paid the same rate (per hour). If they work the same number of hours, they receive the same annual wage. It is illegal to pay one more than the other.

    I saw the news story yesterday about Tescos. Women were claiming that it's unfair for men in the warehouse to be paid ~£3/hour more than women stacking the shelves on the supermarket floor.

    These are two different jobs, therefore the company has every right to have 2 different rates of pay. Yes there is some overlap in terms of skill set - but the warehouse job clearly requires more skill. The technical skills (such as operating a forklift truck) are vastly more complicated than putting a few loaves of bread onto a shelf. The warehouse itself is a hazardous environment, so it's right that they are paid a premium for this reason alone.

    To me, I see no issue - the more skilled job (warehouse) is paid more than the less skilled job (shop floor stacking)

    This is not a gender pay gap argument. This is an argument that one job is of equal skill level to a different job. There happens to be more men working in the warehouse, but this is totally irrelevant.

    This also comes after the BBC editor Carrie Gracie was arguing that she should be paid the same as her male colleagues. Her males colleagues who happen to do a different job. This isn't a gender pay gap argument, this is again an argument that one job is of equal skill to a different job. It just so happens the male is in the higher skilled job (or at least what the BBC deems is higher skilled and more valued job), but again this is totally irrelevant.


    So feminists - please tell me what I'm missing here? Women and men who do the same job, and work the same hours, are paid exactly the same. Women apparently earn "less" due to a variety of reasons, including:

    - women choose to do lower skilled jobs
    - women are more likely to work part time
    - women take time off for maternity leave
    Ah yes but remember, facts are used by white cis men to subjugate and systematically oppress women to make sure they cannot earn as much as men. Therefore facts are irrelevant.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by snowman77)
    It is illegal to pay one more than the other.
    But is it actually though? Lots of jobs advertise their salaries as depending on experience/qualifications, and lots of potential employees will be looking to negotiate their salary too.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smack)
    But is it actually though? Lots of jobs advertise their salaries as depending on experience/qualifications, and lots of potential employees will be looking to negotiate their salary too.
    It’s illegal to pay somebody extra due to their gender. The points you laid out have nothing to do with gender and are legitimate reasons to pay one candidate more than the other.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kaffee_1998)
    Ah yes but remember, facts are used by white cis men to subjugate and systematically oppress women to make sure they cannot earn as much as men. Therefore facts are irrelevant.
    That is true. :lol:

    (Original post by Smack)
    But is it actually though? Lots of jobs advertise their salaries as depending on experience/qualifications, and lots of potential employees will be looking to negotiate their salary too.
    Then it's still not a gender pay gap argument.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    It is not prima facie illegal to award different levels of remuneration to individuals performing the same role, thus nor is it illegal to pay a man and a woman differently for performing said role providing gender is not, demonstrably, the sole factor in that equation.

    Consequently, whether or not a bona fide 'pay gap' still exists notwithstanding the above fact, your highly curated and specious examples are frankly immaterial to the reality—or otherwise—of de facto discrimination between the sexes in matters of professional compensation.

    Try harder.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Profesh)
    It is not prima facie illegal to award different levels of remuneration to individuals performing the same role, thus nor is it illegal to pay a man and a woman differently for performing said role providing gender is not, demonstrably, the sole factor in that equation.

    Consequently, whether or not a bona fide 'pay gap' might still exist notwithstanding the above fact, your highly curated and specious examples are frankly immaterial to the reality—or otherwise—of de facto discrimination between the sexes in matters of professional compensation.

    Try harder.
    In English now please?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by snowman77)
    Then it's still not a gender pay gap argument.
    What's a "gender pay gap argument"?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snowman77)
    I know there's a lot of threads on feminism and the gender pay gap already, but I think we need to end this debate once and for all.
    Dont apologise for that. The more threads, the more attention that feminism gets, the better!!!!

    "We need to take the threat of feminism far more seriously than we do, and to start fighting it. This will be a very difficult challenge because feminists don’t acquire their power through democratic means, nor through merit, and they exert their power out of sight. The first stage of the battle against feminism is to raise the consciousness of more people about the true nature of feminism in the modern era. Then we – the majority of both men and women, whose interests are being assaulted by feminists – will be in a better position to demand of our political leaders and others that they stop their spineless capitulation to these awful women."
    Mike Buchanan. Feminism: The Ugly Truth.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snowman77)
    I know there's a lot of threads on feminism and the gender pay gap already, but I think we need to end this debate once and for all. Because the nonsense that is spouted by feminists on this subject makes me cringe.

    Two workers. 1 male, 1 female. Both are working exactly the same job. They are paid the same rate (per hour). If they work the same number of hours, they receive the same annual wage. It is illegal to pay one more than the other.

    I saw the news story yesterday about Tescos. Women were claiming that it's unfair for men in the warehouse to be paid ~£3/hour more than women stacking the shelves on the supermarket floor.

    These are two different jobs, therefore the company has every right to have 2 different rates of pay. Yes there is some overlap in terms of skill set - but the warehouse job clearly requires more skill. The technical skills (such as operating a forklift truck) are vastly more complicated than putting a few loaves of bread onto a shelf. The warehouse itself is a hazardous environment, so it's right that they are paid a premium for this reason alone.

    To me, I see no issue - the more skilled job (warehouse) is paid more than the less skilled job (shop floor stacking)

    This is not a gender pay gap argument. This is an argument that one job is of equal skill level to a different job. There happens to be more men working in the warehouse, but this is totally irrelevant.

    This also comes after the BBC editor Carrie Gracie was arguing that she should be paid the same as her male colleagues. Her males colleagues who happen to do a different job. This isn't a gender pay gap argument, this is again an argument that one job is of equal skill to a different job. It just so happens the male is in the higher skilled job (or at least what the BBC deems is higher skilled and more valued job), but again this is totally irrelevant.


    So feminists - please tell me what I'm missing here? Women and men who do the same job, and work the same hours, are paid exactly the same. Women apparently earn "less" due to a variety of reasons, including:

    - women choose to do lower skilled jobs
    - women are more likely to work part time
    - women take time off for maternity leave
    I heard that the reason why John Sopel is paid more than Carrie Grace (who were both world editors) is because John has previously presented lots of shows before he got the job. Therefore, with each new job he took, his salary increased which in turn resulted in him being paid more than his female coutnerpart.

    So it isn't really related to the 'gender pay gap'.

    And this is the case for probably more incidences where people have accused employers for inequal pay. There are many other reasons to why someone may be paid more than someone else (even if they had the same job), other than 'gender discrimination'.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by snowman77)
    I know there's a lot of threads on feminism and the gender pay gap already, but I think we need to end this debate once and for all. Because the nonsense that is spouted by feminists on this subject makes me cringe.

    Two workers. 1 male, 1 female. Both are working exactly the same job. They are paid the same rate (per hour). If they work the same number of hours, they receive the same annual wage. It is illegal to pay one more than the other.

    I saw the news story yesterday about Tescos. Women were claiming that it's unfair for men in the warehouse to be paid ~£3/hour more than women stacking the shelves on the supermarket floor.

    These are two different jobs, therefore the company has every right to have 2 different rates of pay. Yes there is some overlap in terms of skill set - but the warehouse job clearly requires more skill. The technical skills (such as operating a forklift truck) are vastly more complicated than putting a few loaves of bread onto a shelf. The warehouse itself is a hazardous environment, so it's right that they are paid a premium for this reason alone.

    To me, I see no issue - the more skilled job (warehouse) is paid more than the less skilled job (shop floor stacking)

    This is not a gender pay gap argument. This is an argument that one job is of equal skill level to a different job. There happens to be more men working in the warehouse, but this is totally irrelevant.

    This also comes after the BBC editor Carrie Gracie was arguing that she should be paid the same as her male colleagues. Her males colleagues who happen to do a different job. This isn't a gender pay gap argument, this is again an argument that one job is of equal skill to a different job. It just so happens the male is in the higher skilled job (or at least what the BBC deems is higher skilled and more valued job), but again this is totally irrelevant.


    So feminists - please tell me what I'm missing here? Women and men who do the same job, and work the same hours, are paid exactly the same. Women apparently earn "less" due to a variety of reasons, including:

    - women choose to do lower skilled jobs
    - women are more likely to work part time
    - women take time off for maternity leave
    Is this just your opinion or are you telling us that is what the law says exactly? Surely the womens claim is that the job they are comparing to amounts to equal work under the Equalities Act? That is for the court to decide.

    I cant see why its much different from the Birmingham Council cases?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smack)
    What's a "gender pay gap argument"?
    That men and women get paid different rates for exactly the same job (which they don't).

    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Is this just your opinion or are you telling us that is what the law says exactly? Surely the womens claim is that the job they are comparing to amounts to equal work under the Equalities Act? That is for the court to decide.

    I cant see why its much different from the Birmingham Council cases?
    Exactly - they're trying to compare 2 different jobs. This is nothing to do with gender, but feminists have twisted it to make it seem that way.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by snowman77)
    That men and women get paid different rates for exactly the same job (which they don't).

    Exactly - they're trying to compare 2 different jobs. This is nothing to do with gender, but feminists have twisted it to make it seem that way.
    You are allowed to compare equal work under the Equalities Act, its not as simple as you make out. The job title doesnt have to get in the way.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snowman77)
    In English now please?
    Your argument is begging the question: it is perfectly legal, moreover culturally de rigueur, that salaries may vary between individuals of nominally identical function, job-title and seniority depending on relative experience, prospects for advancement, and still more nebulous considerations at the sole discretion of upper management.

    As such, while I don't claim definitive knowledge of whether women are indeed subjected to institutional persecution in such matters—not least because even identifying a potentially actionable case with respect to something so confidential and plausibly deniable is quite difficult enough at the best of times—cherry-picking the most blatantly frivolous allegations from lumpen jobsworths who would make up the dregs of any workforce in order to demonstrate your intellectually laughable hypothesis seems broadly analogous to arguing that because false accusations of rape exist, rape itself therefore does not exist.

    In short: try harder.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Andrew97)
    It’s illegal to pay somebody extra due to their gender. The points you laid out have nothing to do with gender and are legitimate reasons to pay one candidate more than the other.
    They are. They're also easy getout arguments for those who don't commit to equal pay - "oh him? No, his contract just has extra responsibilities to hers".

    Frankly the "it's illegal" argument for a gender pay gap not existing is nonsense. Because no-one has ever broken the law...
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by snowman77)
    That men and women get paid different rates for exactly the same job (which they don't).
    In my post I explained to you how two people can get paid different rates for the same job.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    They are. They're also easy getout arguments for those who don't commit to equal pay - "oh him? No, his contract just has extra responsibilities to hers".
    This is the most absurd argument I have ever heard.

    The idea that what you describe is some kind of dodge or trick.

    If one person's job has more responsibility than another, that is a material difference in their job and an entirely reasonable rationale for one being paid more than the other.
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

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

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