Discuss pay gap: "gender pay" versus "performance pay"

51
Found 7th FebEdited by:"splender"
Anyone knows how your workplace pays its staff? Is it hush-hush and vague? Is it too sensitive subject to discuss with colleagues?

Does your management/supervisor ask you to do less than another colleague because you are on a lower rate than others? (funny ha-ha)

Pay on gender, pay on performance or bit both (with gender or performance skewed to carry more weight)? (Any adjustment up in £ for mental and physical disability?) Is there more gap in low-paid jobs versus that in high-paid jobs?

Current news: UK businesses, local and central public services, Third Sector, may be liable to billions.

To help with this thread, here is the definition of What is equal work from the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

e.g. Tesco is liable to £4bn , ~200,000 staff (Tesco turnover YE 2017 is £56bn)
Birmingham City Council, £1bn in 2012 Supreme Court judgment, but more liability
BBC etc.
Community Updates
Misc
Top comments
Regarding the Tesco case. My female friend used to work in a Tesco warehouse and was paid the exact same money as the men so I don't really see what this lawsuit is about. If the Store Assistants want more money then go and work in the warehouse.
Different job, different pay. It's simple.
50 Comments
Mostly pay for performance.

Last time I did some hiring I needed 10 people, and advertised a salary range of 30-45k.

Two of the candidates (1M 1F) negotiated and justified a 45k starting salary, the others didn't make any effort to negotiate, so I started them on 30k. Nothing to do with gender in this example just down to the individual.
Since i see everyones payroll details i don't discuss pay at all with anyone in work and will always remove myself from any conversations where people speculate on what others are paid.

In all the companies I've worked for and signed off the payroll in there has been no obvious gaps between genders, races or anything else you can use to divide people other than how good they are at their job.
Regarding the Tesco case. My female friend used to work in a Tesco warehouse and was paid the exact same money as the men so I don't really see what this lawsuit is about. If the Store Assistants want more money then go and work in the warehouse.
Different job, different pay. It's simple.
To help with this thread, here is the definition of What is equal work from the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

An extract from the above web page:-

There are three kinds of equal work:

  • like work - this is where the works involves similar tasks which require similar skills, and any differences in the work are not of practical importance. For example, a woman cook preparing lunches for directors and a male chef cooking breakfast, lunch and tea for employees
  • work rated as equivalent - this is where the work has been rated under a fair job evaluation scheme as being of equal value in terms of how demanding it is. For example, the work of an occupational health nurse might be rated as equivalent to that of a production supervisor when components of the job such as skill, responsibility and effort are assessed by a fair job evaluation scheme,
  • work of equal value - this is work which is not similar and has not been rated as equivalent, but is of equal value in terms of demands such as effort, skill and decision-making. eg a clerical assistant and a warehouse operative.
Edited by: "splender" 7th Feb
SJHan14 m ago

Regarding the Tesco case. My female friend used to work in a Tesco …Regarding the Tesco case. My female friend used to work in a Tesco warehouse and was paid the exact same money as the men so I don't really see what this lawsuit is about. If the Store Assistants want more money then go and work in the warehouse.Different job, different pay. It's simple.



I have just added the above comment which may change your view in consideration of different jobs.
Edited by: "splender" 7th Feb
splender8 m ago

I have just added the above comment which may change your view in …I have just added the above comment which may change your view in consideration of different jobs.


Perhaps the "women" that are complaining ought to go and work in the warehouse for a week before claiming that the work is equal.

My friend now works in a Tesco store so has experienced both aspects. She has always said that she wouldn't want to go back to the warehouse work.
Edited by: "SJHan" 7th Feb
DKLS27 m ago

Mostly pay for performance.Last time I did some hiring I needed 10 people, …Mostly pay for performance.Last time I did some hiring I needed 10 people, and advertised a salary range of 30-45k.Two of the candidates (1M 1F) negotiated and justified a 45k starting salary, the others didn't make any effort to negotiate, so I started them on 30k. Nothing to do with gender in this example just down to the individual.


Wow, if you're hiring people on that much then just think how much money you must be on.

That's the response right?


SJHan20 m ago

Regarding the Tesco case. My female friend used to work in a Tesco …Regarding the Tesco case. My female friend used to work in a Tesco warehouse and was paid the exact same money as the men so I don't really see what this lawsuit is about. If the Store Assistants want more money then go and work in the warehouse.Different job, different pay. It's simple.


Yeah I actually agree. These do seem to be about different jobs.

I suspect the argument is that they know what gender would typically work in these roles and discriminate thusly but that seems hard to prove.

Personallyi think we should be far more transparent about pay across all sectors and that women should not just receive equal pay but also great help in remaining in work after having kids.
The problem is most companies dont like employees talking about pay to each other and that mainly due to the fact they pay everyone differently, depending on what they can get away with.
As a business if you can save 15k on salary, how much stock would you need to shift to equate that.
So they do it but I believe it only creates animosity between employees, as eventually they will find out. I think base pay should be transparent, one job equals same pay but performance based increases should not be transparent.
master104 m ago

The problem is most companies dont like employees talking about pay to …The problem is most companies dont like employees talking about pay to each other and that mainly due to the fact they pay everyone differently, depending on what they can get away with.As a business if you can save 15k on salary, how much stock would you need to shift to equate that. So they do it but I believe it only creates animosity between employees, as eventually they will find out. I think base pay should be transparent, one job equals same pay but performance based increases should not be transparent.



I don't see that really working in practice. If base pay per job was the same for everyone then you would always take the person with the most experience. At the moment you can take someone on that is a little less experienced because you will probably pay them less than the demands from a person with a lot of experience.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals33 m ago

Wow, if you're hiring people on that much then just think how much money …Wow, if you're hiring people on that much then just think how much money you must be on.That's the response right?


Must admit I do love consultancy contracting rates
CoeK16 m ago

I don't see that really working in practice. If base pay per job was the …I don't see that really working in practice. If base pay per job was the same for everyone then you would always take the person with the most experience. At the moment you can take someone on that is a little less experienced because you will probably pay them less than the demands from a person with a lot of experience.


Then you factor in experience when revealing pay or setting wage scales.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals6 m ago

Then you factor in experience when revealing pay or setting wage scales.



How do you see that working?
CoeK5 m ago

How do you see that working?


You apply a percentage increase in pay related to experience.

You also apply performance bonuses to existing staff. Greater transparency, greater accountability.
Edited by: "HotEnglishAndWelshDeals" 7th Feb
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals7 m ago

You apply a percentage increase in pay related to experience.You also …You apply a percentage increase in pay related to experience.You also apply performance bonuses to existing staff. Greater transparency, greater accountability.



How do you work this % increase for experience? Like one year =5% etc? Too many variables to have a simple transparent scale.
CoeK42 m ago

How do you work this % increase for experience? Like one year =5% etc? …How do you work this % increase for experience? Like one year =5% etc? Too many variables to have a simple transparent scale.


Thats why I said base rate transparent and performance increases not transparent. If you fit the criteria for a job you get x pay and if you perform better tjan others you get y% more.
master106 m ago

Thats why I said base rate transparent and performance increases not …Thats why I said base rate transparent and performance increases not transparent. If you fit the criteria for a job you get x pay and if you perform better tjan others you get y% more.



And if 10 people fit the criteria for a job which one do i pick?
If i pay them all the same then it would be the most experienced of the lot, i make a judgment on this though, so 2 years at KPMG for example is worth more than someone who spent 10 years working for some small accountancy firm.
How do i grade them both though? Maybe i can pay the guy with 10 years experience £40k but the KPMG guy i would have to pay £50k to get even though he has much less experience, but it is different types of experience, do i have to use a massive chart to find out what the pay should be?

If i can just pay a base of 30k then pad that with any number i like how is that different to how it works now? Since i can make a "performance" adjustment in whatever way i like.
Companies get away with paying anyone less, historically women have been paid less and companies are only too pleased to exploit the anomaly.

People, men or women should be paid according to their ability, skillset, effort and performance.
Edited by: "davewave" 7th Feb
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals2 m ago

Yes exactly like that. You grade the experience and apply it as a …Yes exactly like that. You grade the experience and apply it as a percentage to the basic wage.People are able to challenge this but throughout, you have total transparency.I've noticed before you're very dismissive of anything requiring even a tiny bit of effort. This is very doable though and better than the status quo.



Hiring people is a part of my job, but not a particularly important or interesting part. I would rather use my own judgement in an interview than be told by some HR person what the going rate is for each person i interview.
davewave7 m ago

Companies get away with paying anyone less, historically women have been …Companies get away with paying anyone less, historically women have been paid less and companies are only too pleased to exploit the anomaly.People, men or women should be paid according to their ability, skillset, effort and performance.



I agree that is how people should be paid and it is how i would do it too.
CoeK1 h, 59 m ago

And if 10 people fit the criteria for a job which one do i pick? If i pay …And if 10 people fit the criteria for a job which one do i pick? If i pay them all the same then it would be the most experienced of the lot, i make a judgment on this though, so 2 years at KPMG for example is worth more than someone who spent 10 years working for some small accountancy firm. How do i grade them both though? Maybe i can pay the guy with 10 years experience £40k but the KPMG guy i would have to pay £50k to get even though he has much less experience, but it is different types of experience, do i have to use a massive chart to find out what the pay should be?If i can just pay a base of 30k then pad that with any number i like how is that different to how it works now? Since i can make a "performance" adjustment in whatever way i like.


You pick the one most suitable for the role. Thats not necessarily the one with the most experience. If in your eyes one person is worth 50k compared to 40k then maybe that job level he/she has applied for is not challenging enough. They need a role with a more demanding atmosphere and consequently more pay.

You dont pick willy nilly and inflate base pays, its based on performance. X,y,z% for under, average and high performers. At the end of the day, if you are willing to hire someone they are obviously capable of carrying out the roles and responsibilites, and if thats the case they get paid the same.

No one model works for everyone, but its an adaptation of the models.
master107 m ago

You pick the one most suitable for the role. Thats not necessarily the one …You pick the one most suitable for the role. Thats not necessarily the one with the most experience. If in your eyes one person is worth 50k compared to 40k then maybe that job level he/she has applied for is not challenging enough. They need a role with a more demanding atmosphere and consequently more pay.You dont pick willy nilly and inflate base pays, its based on performance. X,y,z% for under, average and high performers. At the end of the day, if you are willing to hire someone they are obviously capable of carrying out the roles and responsibilites, and if thats the case they get paid the same.No one model works for everyone, but its an adaptation of the models.



I pick based on a variety of criteria, one of which is how much will i have to pay them. Everyone given an interview will be capable of performing the role to at least a basic degree. The question is how much is it worth paying someone that might do a better than basic job. The amount of experience isn't always an indicator of that and often people with little experience put more in as they are unproven and are happy for the chance to prove themselves.
I like to add in another factor for consideration how equal pay should be. In our lives many things are fixed equal costs, so equal pay ensures people live fairly.

This is to state that w
hen one get's the pay, what are the fixed equal or nearly equal costs in living just to go to work:-

1. Community charge
2. rent is at local market rate (mortgage rates are national)
3. fuel costs for car
4. utility costs (unit costs for gas, electricity and water+sewage)
5. bus and train fare (fares which are fixed per journey, or fares which have a fixed portion of the fare)
6. dental and prescription charges
7. road tax
8. fixed lines and mobile charges
9. TV licence + minimal broadband
10. any other things which is priced per seat.

So at towards the low-wage end, these more or less equal fixed costs have greater impact. These fixed costs are independent of gender and independent of job performance.
CoeK12 m ago

I pick based on a variety of criteria, one of which is how much will i …I pick based on a variety of criteria, one of which is how much will i have to pay them. Everyone given an interview will be capable of performing the role to at least a basic degree. The question is how much is it worth paying someone that might do a better than basic job. The amount of experience isn't always an indicator of that and often people with little experience put more in as they are unproven and are happy for the chance to prove themselves.


Again, the transparency is the key aspect you're missing. That is fundamental. If people wanted to challenge an aspect of their pay, that process would be transparent.

You haven't presented an argument or scenario against this proposal.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals8 m ago

Again, the transparency is the key aspect you're missing. That is …Again, the transparency is the key aspect you're missing. That is fundamental. If people wanted to challenge an aspect of their pay, that process would be transparent.You haven't presented an argument or scenario against this proposal.



Constant disagreements about how much a person is worth. People can be content with their pay until they see what their colleague is getting for "doing the same job" then you have to tell them their colleague is better than them for x,y and z reasons, then they disagree and tell you why they aren't. It would get old fast and i don't see it ever concluding with them doing anything other than leaving the company. Especially at the lowest rungs.
CoeK22 m ago

I pick based on a variety of criteria, one of which is how much will i …I pick based on a variety of criteria, one of which is how much will i have to pay them. Everyone given an interview will be capable of performing the role to at least a basic degree. The question is how much is it worth paying someone that might do a better than basic job. The amount of experience isn't always an indicator of that and often people with little experience put more in as they are unproven and are happy for the chance to prove themselves.


I never said that experience was an indicator, you said that. The whole point of the interview stage is to see who fits the criteria best, but at the end of the day they are still doing the same job and pay should be the same. If they subsequently take on more responsibilities then they get paid for that.

The eay you work you would have 5 people doing the same job on 5 different wages, thats a disaster waiting to happen.
master102 m ago

I never said that experience was an indicator, you said that. The whole …I never said that experience was an indicator, you said that. The whole point of the interview stage is to see who fits the criteria best, but at the end of the day they are still doing the same job and pay should be the same. If they subsequently take on more responsibilities then they get paid for that.The eay you work you would have 5 people doing the same job on 5 different wages, thats a disaster waiting to happen.



I would have 5 people getting paid what i think they are worth. It has been working for years now so not sure where the disaster is coming from?
CoeK4 m ago

I would have 5 people getting paid what i think they are worth. It has …I would have 5 people getting paid what i think they are worth. It has been working for years now so not sure where the disaster is coming from?


Animosity from the fact you started one 10k higher than the other for the same job. You keep talking about paying for what theyre worth, well thats not comparing the SAME job then is it. If somebody is doing more hes not doing the same job.
master104 m ago

Animosity from the fact you started one 10k higher than the other for the …Animosity from the fact you started one 10k higher than the other for the same job. You keep talking about paying for what theyre worth, well thats not comparing the SAME job then is it. If somebody is doing more hes not doing the same job.



Nobody is doing the same job here, they are doing roughly comparative jobs. Nobody talks about their wages with each other, maybe this is only for people who work in tesco?

The only time someone talks about their wage is when they aren't happy with it, then all they have to do is make a case for why they should get more. A good case isn't x gets paid this much so i want it too.

People also get reviews annually.
Edited by: "CoeK" 7th Feb
CoeK14 m ago

Constant disagreements about how much a person is worth. People can be …Constant disagreements about how much a person is worth. People can be content with their pay until they see what their colleague is getting for "doing the same job" then you have to tell them their colleague is better than them for x,y and z reasons, then they disagree and tell you why they aren't. It would get old fast and i don't see it ever concluding with them doing anything other than leaving the company. Especially at the lowest rungs.


This is what's known as managing people.

Again, I don't actually see a realistic issue that you are objecting to.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals2 m ago

This is what's known as managing people.Again, I don't actually see a …This is what's known as managing people.Again, I don't actually see a realistic issue that you are objecting to.



Obviously not, that would require you to have experience managing people.
CoeK13 m ago

I would have 5 people getting paid what i think they are worth. It has …I would have 5 people getting paid what i think they are worth. It has been working for years now so not sure where the disaster is coming from?


What you think they are worth is informed by the market and their qualifications, all things that could be factored into a transparent system.

You're not making a case against a more transparent system. I can honestly say that I don't recognise any of the issues you raise bring problematic.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals11 m ago

What you think they are worth is informed by the market and their …What you think they are worth is informed by the market and their qualifications, all things that could be factored into a transparent system.You're not making a case against a more transparent system. I can honestly say that I don't recognise any of the issues you raise bring problematic.



Yes i know you don't. But then why would you?
The rate of pay is per job where I work. Absolutely no difference between male and female. The only different rates for the same job are in the first couple of years where there are incremental rises up to the full rate, based on length of service.
CoeK6 m ago

Yes i know you don't. But then why would you?


Because I have experience of managing people.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals31 m ago

Because I have experience of managing people.


Aww do you? What about reports? Do you have to do them in your job?

I'm fed up doing reports for operations people.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals4 h, 54 m ago

You apply a percentage increase in pay related to experience.You also …You apply a percentage increase in pay related to experience.You also apply performance bonuses to existing staff. Greater transparency, greater accountability.


More experience doesn't necessarily mean somebody is better at their job.
Avatar
deleted265520
People should be forced to have unique avatars. Scrolling down this thread is a pain.
Is it Holland where everyone's salary had to be published by law?

Why don't we, would put this all to bed. It's very old fashioned and slightly weird people get squeamish about talking money.
HotEnglishAndWelshDeals6 h, 38 m ago

Wow, if you're hiring people on that much then just think how much money …Wow, if you're hiring people on that much then just think how much money you must be on.That's the response right? .....


I really don't think he was being that petty. Surely it is valuable for the debate to have genuinely successful people sharing their experience? I'm sure you can appreciate this type of real world input, even if it feels a bit foreign and unfamiliar to your own.

ipswich7858 m ago

More experience doesn't necessarily mean somebody is better at their job.


Very true. Not work of course, but even on here, some members with circa 18 months experience can appear like 10+ year veterans.
A place I worked was heavily biased against female employees for the production area . The wages were the same but because of women going off on maternity , and losing time to look after kids ( confirmed by a drunken manager on a night out). So basically if you were a guy you had an automatic advantage at an interview
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Top Discussions

    Top Discussions

    Top Merchants