Theresa May: Equal Pay - where Harman dithers, we will deliver

This week, some startling statistics published by the Chartered Management Institute showed that last year, the gender pay gap got bigger.  Male earnings grew at a faster rate than female earnings, despite the fact that women were found to enjoy faster career progression.  The same survey found that the average female team leader is five years younger than her male equivalent; the average female ‘department head’ three years younger; and the average female director four years younger.

Yet Harriet Harman’s only response was to issue a statement saying: “more needs to be done to tackle unequal pay.  Her priorities for women will include pressing forward with the Government’s commitment to reduce the pay gap between men and women.”  Too right, more needs to be done.  But we’ve had more than ten years of this Government.  Why hasn’t it already been done?  When is it going to be done?  Harriet Harman gave a statement to the House of Commons in July outlining her “priorities” for women – yet in that statement she failed to make a single decision or commitment, as I pointed out at the time.

The gender pay gap matters for all sorts of reasons.  First, and most obvious, it hits women in the pocket.  The Equal Opportunities Commission estimates that the average woman will lose or forego £300,000 over her lifetime as a result of the pay gap.  Second, there is a strong business case for employers to ensure fair and equal pay across the workforce.  And third, the gender pay gap is bad for the economy.  It is estimated that increased women’s employment could benefit the economy by £23 billion.  And making better use of women’s skills would help to finance public spending such as pension provision, as the population ages.

It’s not good enough for the Minister for Women to say that “she’ll get round to it at some point”.  Women are earning less than they could and should be, and that’s simply not fair. 

Look out in the coming weeks for the Conservatives’ proposals for how to bridge the gender pay gap.  Where Harriet Harman dithers, we will deliver.

Comments

[Moral minority]

Pay should be a matter of contract, i.e. voluntary agreement between the employee and the employer rather than regulation by bureaucrats.

You don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate. I have worked for and run several large companies. I have yet to find an example of unequal pay. There were, however, many examples of where women were promoted in the name of positive discrimination.

The Conservatives should be seeking to abolish the Equal Opportunities Commission. It is a sexist organisation that fails to address discrimination against men.

I look forward to the abolition of the Conservative Women's Organisation and Women2Win. Alternatively, there should be a Conservative Men's Organisation and Men2Win. It is time to rid the Party of blatant sexism.

[David Strauss]

What this fails to do is address why there is a gap and that is because there is no proof that it is down to sexual discrimination and therefore it's use is just a reason for PC male-bashing

There can only be discrimination if Man A is paid more than Woman B when they both work for the same company, doing the same job, the same hours, have the same talent/experience and add the same amount of value to the company.

If there is any difference then they will be paid differently.

Also research shows that more women are CHOOSING to stay at home and look after their children in their early years (at least).

Therefore this will depress the average female salary as many are CHOOSING to leave a successful career on hold. When they come back to work, they will be paid less than someone (including childless women!) who did not have a career gap becuase those that stayed will have pay rises and and now more experience.

My fear is that when thse proposals come forward, just like with A List, they will be full of positive discrimination for women which means negative discrimination for men.

It is the usual feminist ' we believe in equality, plus more for women ' trick.

[Fiona Davies]

Moral Minority - I can see why your views put you in the minority. Do you deny that women have particular problems in pay, pensions, domestic violence, trafficking etc etc etc? Why shouldn't the Conservative Party try to address those? or do you want to write off the support of women (who do constitute a majority of the population after all)?

If you want to set up a Conservative Men's Organisation - you can. CWO and Women 2 Win were just set up by people who wanted to set them up.

[DavisFan]

UNSOUND

[Grayling4Leader]

Indeed it's unsound. What we need is a party of hard men who can take the fight to Brown. None of this namby pamby stuff. Make Liam the Minister for Women - he'll have them back in the kitchen before we know it. And quite right too.

[Ken Stevens]

"the average female team leader is five years younger than her male equivalent; the average female ‘department head’ three years younger; and the average female director four years younger."

I wonder what the salary comparisons would be solely with men of similar age and experience, i.e. compare like with like.

If that is missing the point (i.e. that it is solely competence that is relevant, rather than age/experience) then, as Moral Minority observes, you don't get what you deserve, you get what you negotiate. The option is then to resign and move to somewhere that values you better -- if you can find such a place. Market forces, I believe it is called.

At lower levels of employment, formal job evaluation processes can be and are used to enforce equal pay for equal work. Any reason why this is not seemingly also the case at higher levels?

"..It is estimated that increased women’s employment could benefit the economy by £23 billion. And making better use of women’s skills would help to finance public spending such as pension provision, as the population ages."
Now a real chauvinistic dinosaur viewpoint: if we , rightly, place so much store on the social benefits of family stability, why do we want more mothers to go out to work, rather than stay at home nurturing the kids, if that is their preferred option and they can afford to do so?

Maybe that "lost" £23Bn is partially offset by the savings of reduced juvenile bovver. Maybe it doesn't take into account the money injected into the economy by working mothers paying for increased employment in the childcare industry.

[Moral minority]

Fiona, what does trafficking and domestic violence have to do with equal pay? BTW, staistics show that men are very often the victims of domestic violence too.

Do you honestly think that a Conservative Men's Organisation and Men2Win would receive official Party backing and funding? The CWO and W2W are blatantly sexist and should be abolished.

David Strauss is right when he says "There can only be discrimination if Man A is paid more than Woman B when they both work for the same company, doing the same job, the same hours, have the same talent/experience and add the same amount of value to the company."

As I posted above, I have not come across such discrimination against women in a long career working in large companies. But I have found discrimination against men.

I suspect that the Chartered Management Institute has joined the equal opportunities industry. It will be interesting to see whether it gets a grant from the Equal Opportunities Commission.

[Tony Makara]

It is quite astonishing that gender pay differentials still exist in the 21st century. As has been said Labour have had ten long years to right the wrongs of unequal pay. If they haven't done it by now its fair to assume that they will never do it. As for Harriet Harman, her word is worthless. A woman who can chop and change her opinion on the war in Iraq so readily and lie so openly cannot be trusted.

[Sean Fear]

No more astounding, Tony, than the fact that there are wage differentials between the middle and working classes.

Conservatives, of all people, should not be trying to legislate for equal outcomes between different groups in society.

[Fiona Davies]

Moral Minority: I was pointing out things like women's pensions because you were complaining about CWO and W2W. You might not have encountered discrimination in your workplace but I doubt you know what all of your colleagues earn.

Sean Fear, was that a joke?

[Man in a Shed]

This really should be none of the governments business, except where it is an employer.

You fail to mention child birth and rearing in your article. You also miss the point that people, and sometimes the sexs have different priorities in life. If this is true then the results of your 'action' will in practice be discrimination against men.

Haven't we had enough of all this with Wimmin2Win ?

Forget tokenism and state control - give us freedom and encouragement.

[Sean Fear]

No.

[Think about it]

Obtaining the best salary is only loosely based on the skills needed for the job, your cv etc, it is an art-form all in itself.

Could it be that men are less reasonable and thus more prepared to walk out if they don't like the pay on offer?

If you don't like your pay resign. We're all just commodities for our employers and faced with losing you, you'll find your true value.

It doesn't need more state intervention.

[DavisFan]

This marks a rare moment of agreement with Grayling4Leader.

I doubt that even under a Grayling leadership we would try to argue for anything as unconservative as 'equality'.

I'd reccommend we make Steve Norris Minister for Women, but we should change the job title to "ladies' man".

[david]

Polly will be pleased, another Tory in her camp.

[Grayling4Leader]

Great idea DavisFan. Maybe we have found the territory upon which we can forge the "dream ticket".

OK, let's have a poll of Conservative Home posters:

Do you think the position of "Minister for Women" should be re-named "Ladies' Man"?

Simply answer "yes" or "no", and add the wittiest sexist comments you can think of.

[Sean Fear]

On several issues, David, Polly is the Conservative leadership's inspiration.

[Moral minority]

Fiona, I have encountered discrimination in the workplace. To meet targets, women and ethnic minorities were promoted above better qualified white men. Just like Cameron's Priority List of candidates!

[Sean Fear]

Moral minority, one can also encounter the reverse.

But on the general point, I don't think one can work from the assumption that any overall difference in average mens' and womens' wages is down to unfair discrimination, any more than one make that assumption in relation to differential outcomes between any other groups in society.

That's why I think we should not be promising something we can't deliver, and which it would be counter-productive to try.

[Conservative Homer]

Wasnt it Maggie who said "what is desirable is not equality but equality of oppurtunity" (or something along those lines). A government which legislates expressly for the former irrespective of the issues surrounding it is not a conservative government in my book. Presumably next week Teresa will be asking why women are so horribly underrepresented in prisons too.

[Stephen Tolkinghorne]

Theresa May is busy doing the Labour Party's work for it. Not only is the Tory ship sinking fast, but Theresa May is running around trying to drill a few more holes to hasten the sinking.

Mind, she's good experience of this with her 'the nasty party' jibe at the Conservative Party.

With friends and representatives like these......

[Tony Makara]

"No more astounding, Tony, than the fact that there are wage differentials between the middle and working classes."

Sean, there are a number of blue collar professions that pay very well, for example in the construction industry and something a basic as bricklaying. By the same token there are many white collar professions that do not pay all that well. I'm certainly not of the opinion that we should be trying to cap wages or stifle initiative. I certainly support Theresa May's call for parity between genders. I'd also like to see age wiped out of pay differentials. I can remember as a 17 year old resting the fact that I was paid less for doing exactly the same job as those over 18.

[James Maskell]

Again another mistake by the equal outcomes campaigners. They talk about equality but thats not equality at all since the treatment they propose isnt equal and is a form of reverse discrimination which they shouldnt justify any more than the current situation which they campaign against. The system set up for selection of PPCs under Cameron has led to a reverse discrimination against men. The defence used is that it's to balance the unfairness of the past. Do we really believe in reverse discrimination as a form of compensation for the past?

Why are we campaigning for equality when what we are actually talking about is equity? Equality is a natural and normal part of Western life. Our entire economic system is based upon inequality. Those campaigning for equality are fundamentally mistaken in their objectives. Theresa May is wrong. If we campaign for equality, then we do not campaign for the ladder of opportunity or the safety net of welfare as that is a form of discrimination based on social mobility and class. We are calling for Socialism, something I vehemently oppose.

[James Maskell]

Sorry. That should read:

"Inequality is a natural and normal part of Western life."

[Edward]

Why should "more be done now"? If the system has reached equilibrium some years the pay gap will be up a bit, other years it will be down. As Sean says, why go micro-managing it. Shouldn't we trust people to take responsibility themselves?