To think Justine Roberts should not have written this in the FT

[FreeWorker]

Justine writes a comment column in the Recruitment section of the Financial Times section which most MNetters will not have seen as it is behind a paywall.

In her most recent article of yesterday she writes on the gender pay gap and I was astonished to read the following sentences:

"As far as I have seen, then, the gender pay gap has very little to do with discriminatory practices or policies against women."

"The second big problem is that women just do not seem to care as much as men do about salaries and promotion."

One commentator under the FT article called Ezra sums up how I feel.

"Some valid observations - but to say that the gender pay gap has nothing to do with discrimination is frankly delusional."

For those who want to see the full article you may be able to read it via the following link if you search for it via Google and answer a few online questions:

For the rest of the year your pay will be zero

The Financial Times is an extremely influential newspaper in business and Government circles and Justine is also extremely influential as an opinion former because of MN.

AIBU to think that the views Justine has expressed in this article do not reflect the daily experience of women at work? AIBU to think it also contradicts the thousands of posts about unfair treatment at work by women on MN that show discrimination is rampant and that women DO care about salary and promotion?

I have name changed for this post but am a long time male poster on MN and have had male bosses throughout my career who openly and routinely made discriminatory comments in meetings when no women were around to hear them. They knowingly paid women less and passed them over for promotion. I worked in an industry where virtually no women make it to senior positions.

The gender pay gap is always about discrimination in my experience.

HairyLittleCarrot pointed out the key problem here

"very little to do with discriminatory practices

followed by

The behaviours for which men are rewarded in the office (laser-like focus on their own projects; a willingness to tell co-workers what to do without apologising) are often frowned on in women

So employers reward men for behaviours and frown on women for the same behaviours...but this is not a discriminatory practice?

What?"

I think Justine conflates too many things in the article

• yes individuals do have different priorities and for various reasons not always within their control women are often prioritising caring roles. Having a rewarding work life and a rewarding home life shouldn't be seen as some sort of unicorn existence and this is a subject for discussion in its own right - and what I think Justine was trying to get at

• BUT this has NOTHING to do with women not getting on EVEN WHEN THEY SHARE THE SAME PRIORITIES AS MEN - which DOES happen

And it is really unhelpful, Justine, to write a woolly piece like that which conflates the two and can easily be read as saying "women choose not to really bother at work". It is really unhelpful

And again there is such a danger of lumping all women and their experiences and priorities together in a way that doesn't really happen with men as a group. Yet there is just as much diversity within the group women as amongst men

"women just do not seem to care as much as men do about salaries and promotion."

No. Women end up with extra considerations which often force make it very difficult for them not to prioritise salary and promotion.

The only way we are going to achieve more equality is for (a) all the shit that comes with running a household to be seen equally men's responsibility, not just women's and (b) it to be acceptable to combine that with paid work (perhaps with some element of flexibility) without your employer then considering you're not serious about the work (for men and women)

Oh and why are traditional "female" jobs often not very well paid?

If women never gave their views because they were worried about criticism we'd be living in Saudi Purdah. I am often the only woman speaking at public events because the other womenar e ironing a husband's shirt, cannot be bothered to come or are worried that what they say will get them into trouble. Take risks. Be bold. The same goes for JR writing in the FT. Do it. If women on here have different views write to the FT with them. Far far too few women write, speak, put themselves out there in front rather than shut away in kitchens and the dull domestic sphere.

Far too many women put themselves and their careers second to their husband's because they marry "up" to men who earn more or men who earn the same so it's relatively easy to say I won't work or just work for pin money and the man can keep me.

As for discrimination at work I like manyo ther women voted with my feet, founded by own outfit and out earn men that way. It's fun.

I advise quite a few women including my daughters or at least discuss it with them on getting more pay.

1. You have to ask. I reckon I am worth £360 an hour and cheap at the price and anyone who has me at that price is more than lucky to have me. If you don't ask you don't get.

1. Too many women don't ask for pay rises often enough.

3,. You have to take risks - moves jobs. Yes security is calm like a comfort blanket but in manyc areers unles you are moving with big pay rises each time you don't get the extra pay. My children's father followed my career hundreds of miles. That paid off. Don't be the vapid follower - be the leader. Take caculated risks.

1. Sell your brand - you are briliant. No one will ever notice that if you just work hard. Spend as long on blowing your own trumpet as on keeping your head down and working.

1. Work full time, lean in. It's wonderful. It pays off. It is win win as you're not saddled with dull domestic dross either and just seen as the fcamily's virtual servant. Be reliable. Always be on time. Many people are quite lazy and don't turn up for work or appointments so as long as you are not you can shine above the vast mass of alsorans.

There endeth the lesson. I shall now return to earning a crust.

The thing that worries me Justine is that you are asuccessful woman and as such your words need even more careful consideration than mine. Some mysogenist employer will read your words and take them as justification why he can pay women less. I know that's not what you meant but it's what may be construed.

This. In spades.

The FT is the paper most read by executives, policy makers, etc etc - in short anyone who has the influence to change the current status quo. And here we have an article by someone who is viewed as being a mouthpiece for women, saying that women don't care how much they are paid, they don't want promotion, that the pay gap is because women are less ambitious not because they are discriminated against.

Great, what a huge stride forward.

I also think that (speaking just for me) the older I've got, the more I've thought oh fgs I'm so tired of fighting for / arguing about equality, I'll just do what it takes, do my best at work, accept that I'll face institutional sexism for ever, (plus ageism, natch) negotiate to the best of my ability and do what I can. And I took a large multinational to court for sex discrimination when I was young. But I just don't have the energy to fight with my husband about pulling his weight (which I do) AND work FT AND manage my life AND fight about my working environment. Having said that I am setting up a group at work to look at gender bias. Thank god the suffragettes weren't such wimps eh?

"Very few of us work for companies that expressly seek to keep women down or out. Pretty much every job I have had since graduation has been in a male-dominated field . . .but in my experience, these sectors are keen to hire more women at all levels."

My experience of working a very male dominated field was that you didn't get discriminated against directly as a woman provided you were essentially indistinguishable from a man - so not too feminine, very confident, etc etc.

And even then, you really had to stand your ground and have the confidence to say to senior men 'why are you asking me to do X or Y menial job' - and if you agreed to do it to be obliging, you'd get written down as useful but not star material.

I was lucky in that I didn't particularly care about the job, hence had no issue with being bolshy - and as a result got paid more and better treated..

I think, Justine, that if you haven't seen that sort of direct discrimination, it's either because you're particularly confident and able to walk straight through it by nature, or because you're shutting your eyes to it.

"The same goes for JR writing in the FT. Do it. If women on here have different views write to the FT with them. "

Good idea, I hope someone does.

Wow.....agree with lots of points made, and everything LTTB said.

IME it's the opposite - women care about LOTS of things, all at the same time. Whereas men don't tend to care about anything except a select few things. They don't want or need to as far as they are concerned. As my DH helpfully told me last night: the amount of tax he pays on his salary is as much as my take home pay so if he didn't have to pay tax, I wouldn't have to work. (Because, of course, I don't have any career aspirations ).

"women just do not seem to care as much as men do about salaries and promotion" should have been "men just do not seem to care as much about work/life balance and doing childcare"

I am shocked by Justine's very narrow view.

I'm surprised that Justine sees so little direct discrimination. I assure you it is there in subtle and not so subtle ways. In the places I have worked (areas desperate to be seen to be retaining and promoting women) it is most obvious when considering the careers of unmarried and childless women.

I have a close male colleague and the shocking things that are said would make your hair curl. Quite apart from the fact that loads of decisions are taken in spaces that I don't have access to or I'm not invited too (nominally social, non work events). In fact it all makes me feel very depressed. Xenia is right though, if you move about more it is possible to shake some of this off.

It's funny how we actively reward men with higher salaries for additional responsibilities while not actually managing all their responsibilities at all; if they were responsible they would be pulling their weight at home.

And by funny I mean fucking ridiculous, illogical and counter-productive.

MovingOnUp he explicitly says IN THE TITLE OF THE POST that "Justine should not have written this".

I think disagreeing with others is fine, too, but sex isn't irrelevant in the slightest.

We've had countless threads over the years documenting how brilliant, assertive, capable professional women have been discriminated against in the workplace both overtly and covertly. It's happened to so many of us, and no, it's not because we didn't want it as much as men; not because we were asking for less; not because we prioritised differently or behaved differently. We didn't choose this or passively accept it. It's not because we are less worthy than the lucky successful women who managed to beat the system either.

That's a really useful apologist narrative for employers though, to justify perpetuating the unfairness further.

Its because women are discriminated against in the workplace.

It is done to us, and not with our consent.

Justine has had access to this mass collection of women's stories accumulated over years and years.

To have reached those conclusions after reading our stories suggests that she does not believe those of us who have shared our experiences. I feel betrayed.

You need to listen to us, Justine.

We need a different kind of #WeBelieveYou.

YANBU

A whole thread started about women's ambition in the workplace completely dominated by views on childcare and relationship inequality. I should be shocked but am not!

Over 20% of women in the UK remain childless. For highly educated women in ambition driven professional careers that percentage edges closer to 50%. These women certainly prioritise pay and promotion. However as long as the myth perpetuates that all women are just grateful for any sort of work / life balance there will never be gender equality in the workplace.

Even for women who do want children the best way to achieve balance is to get promoted far enough to have sufficient autonomy and be paid enough to afford adequate childcare.

Justine, along with WEP, I think you need to review conflating womanhood with motherhood and stop lumping all women together.

Yes I realise that's how some might interpret it if one just reads the title, but I took it to mean she should not have written the points made in the op because they are inaccurate, not that she shouldn't be writing at all.

Yes security is calm like a comfort blanket

Yes, security is like a comfort blanket a reasonable prospect that you can pay your bills this month.

DeoGratias if you are a high earner and have a financial cushion, or if you have a partner that also brings in an income - great, take risks, reach for the stars! If you have no financial cushion (and/or are a single parent), well, you sometimes have to trade your own ambitions off against providing a reasonably secure home for your kids.

Put your hand up if you have ever discovered your male colleague, doing the same job as you was paid more. Have a star if you out-performed that colleague in real, measurable terms and the only difference was you sex. Have a second star if you can chuck in some pregnancy or maternity related discrimination too.

I wonder if she's been misquoted or paraphrased.

I think the worst discrimination probably takes places in worse-paid jobs. It is common knowledge that carers are among the worst paid workers and that women are overrepresented in this group.

At higher (executive/ professional) levels, discrimination tends to be less overt and difficult to demonstrate, because of secrecy about salaries. Discrimination at this level is more subtle, and often works by effectively excluding women with children from certain roles. I couldn't do my job if I didn't have a part-time self-employed partner who can pick up the slack. Not many women are as lucky as me. And I have actively refused promotion because it is not compatible with my commitments - this is a common theme in my place of employment (large manufacturing co), where there are very few women in the most senior roles mainly because once they have children they cannot or will not give the commitment required (hefty travelling schedule).

My DH does school run so rarely starts work before 9.30am, works from home pretty much whenever he feels like it - if necessary to take care of sick kids or attend stuff at school. He's never so much as had a discussion with work about this. A friend works at the same place and she's had to apply for flexible working hours so she can do the school run. She takes annual leave for time off for sick kids or attending stuff at school. Men and women are not treated the same.