Or should we change tact in how we try to close the gender pay gap

[Buccanarab]

A lot of discussions about the gender pay gap seems to centre around getting more women into tradionally male roles, usually STEM, but in my experience and opinion, these roles aren't inherently better or more enjoyable than tradionally female roles, they just pay more.

So would it not be better to focus on trying to increase the salaries of the tradionally female roles to match the male ones?

For instance a teacher or nurse are at least as valuable (arguably more so) to society as an engineer or computer programmer so they should be paid comparable salaries.

Would it not make more sense to pursue this outcome than to continue trying to force women into roles that are deemed superior or am I completely missing the point?

Raise everyones salaries. Everyone is rich

Why hasnt anyone thought of this before..

That wouldn't solve the gender pay gap. Within nursing and teaching, if you are male you are disproportionately more likely to become a headteacher or senior nurse/nurse manager.

The evidence from the past is that the only way to raise salaries is to get more men into an industry. And conversely when more women enter an industry, the salaries go down on average.

The problem is the gap within any given sector. Sometimes there is clear unequal pay as we have seen at the BBC. Often women who reduce hours because of families don’t progress because the men (usually men) in charge are blinkered in thinking.

Support for creation of a proper part-time jobs market would change women’s salary potential.

So many are stuck in the same roles and unable to move/progress as they are trapped by hours agreed for childcare convenience.

The evidence from the past is that the only way to raise salaries is to get more men into an industry. And conversely when more women enter an industry, the salaries go down on average.

Almost sounds like misogyny, doesn't it...

We absolutely should value caring industries more, and place more financial value on traditionally female skills.

But at the same time, no girl should be sitting in school wondering if STEM subjects are for them or just for the boys. I lecture in a STEM subject and more than once have had parents (mothers, actually) ask me in full seriousness if it was an ok career for a woman, was their daughter making a mistake. That needs to be stamped the fuck out.

Really? Gender pay gap is high in the airline industry because the highest earners (pilots) are men, and the lowest (air host/esses ) are female. By your logic, instead of encouraging more women to train as pilots we should say that the job of the air hostesses is just as important so they should be paid the same. Not gonna happen.

But women DO go into STEM subjects. The majority of entrants to medical school are female. It’s a science! And women dominate in most other healthcare roles (which are also extremely valuable but hugely underpaid compared to doctoring). Even in medicine men hold most of the top jobs. This is because it’s almost impossible to be a consultant and work part time. Which women of course tend to do because of families. Maybe the solution is to ask why men aren’t reducing their hours to look after their families? Maybe it should be more acceptable for them. Men have children too!!

Tack. Not tact.

I know I was paid less in my first job just for being female. Same job, same experience, same ability as the bloke. I just got less. Found out years later. I am senior to him now but I wonder who earns most?

Pay tesco checkout operators tesco ceo salaries

It's a SEX pay gap, not a gender pay gap.

When a gender pay gap study actually takes into account things other than just gender and salary, and takes into account such things as; employment industry, job roles, experience levels, hours worked, qualifications, negotiated rates, and all other additional factors that influence pay, there might be a point, but until then there isn't.

Also you aren't even talking about a pay gap anyway, you're talking about jobs which get paid less, you're wanting them to get paid more, because....? But as last time I checked, nurses and teachers have salary bands and both males and females get paid the same when they're in their respective bands.

Often women who reduce hours because of families don’t progress because the men (usually men) in charge are blinkered in thinking.

If only it were just men! (I know you said usually)

My company works with schools. We offer term time only roles. We can be and are really flexible with hours worked.

Can I get it into our HR manager's thick skull that flexibility benefits us as a company? Can I heck. She is at the same time blind to the flexibility we offer the fathers in teh company, the childless, and last but most annoyingly HER, HERSELF. She has a bee in her bonnet about hiring 'mothers'.

Fortunately she is a passive aggressive whinge bag, with no decision making powers. Just hired a mum coming off maternity leave to much pursing of lips

(I could go on all day long about how fucking awful this woman is...)

Tack. Not tact.
There's always one, isn't there!

The answer is most employers need to do a proper pay audit that takes all factors into account - not just comparing median and mean pay as at present.

Tact is not what the OP meant, but it sort of works anyway

There's always one, isn't there!

Yep, and there's aways one who posts that inevitable "There's always one", too.

My suspicion of one of the major reasons behind the gender pay gap is that so many employers have a "what's the least we can get away with" approach and a ban on anyone disclosing their pay to fellow workers.

Get rid of that and you might get rid of a lot of disparity (and not just gender unfairness), but I can't see it ever being done.

The problem is more complex than just one issue.

So yes, there are insufficient women in higher paid careers, and yes we should address that by encouraging women into these careers. And certainly I think that lower paid careers would probably be respected more if men were encouraged to join them, but that's a different issue.

More worryingly however, is that across the board (careers dominated by men or ones in which men and women are represented more equally at the start), men are the ones who are consistently promoted and achieve higher pay. The reasons for this, again, are myriad:

• Unconscious bias that means the men already in those roles promote people who look and sound like them (ie more men)
• Working processes and systems that don't take into account the caring burden that (mostly) women have to take care of
• Corporate cultures that encourage environments in which women do not feel comfortable.
• a society that does not encourage or facilitate men taking on any of these caring responsibilities so that the default assumption is that it will always be the woman.

Then on top, these problems become a bit of a vicious circle. eg men tend to earn more, so even if there's a theoretical view that maybe the man could step up and take on the caring responsibilities, society is hardwired to argue that the lower earner must do so (usually the woman). This does not take into account other issues such as a lower paid career that may be as successful or even more so then the lower paid man.

sorry, or even more so than the "higher" paid man is what it should have said at the end of my last post.

I'm not sure there ever will be parity in pay, overall and dare I say that a significant factor in that (I'm talking in generalised terms not about individuals as there will be many exceptions) is that women are far less likely to want the "Alpha jobs".

I participated in a diversity workshop at my workplace a couple of weeks ago and many of the women (we are all lawyers at a City firm) were adamant that they would only be happy balancing work with motherhood - a year of ML each time (and horrified at the thought of sharing it with the father) and thereafter working 3-4 days a week. Fair enough.

But those people are far less likely to get the top jobs, or get there much slower than the men. You can say what you like about flexibility benefiting the employer but in my role at least, things move so fast in litigation, and clients are demanding and want to get hold of their solicitor when they need to. I know I won't be making myself popular on here, but part time workers in this profession just don't cut the mustard.

You can present people with equal opportunities but they aren't necessarily going to take them.

Maybe it's just biology and there's a limit to what can be done to even the playing field if the players make "traditional" life choices anyway.

You can say what you like about flexibility benefiting the employer but in my role at least, things move so fast in litigation, and clients are demanding and want to get hold of their solicitor when they need to. I know I won't be making myself popular on here, but part time workers in this profession just don't cut the mustard

This is part of the bigger societal issue. The idea that in a corporate role you need to be available 24/7. Until THAT changes, I agree, gender pay won't change. But I disagree that this is just the way it is and that there aren't good reasons to change this culture.

The problems are complex and societal but I think there is also an element of choice.

At my level, lots of the men seem to have a sahm at home. I am the lower earner in my household. My progression will suffer because of part time working, maternity leaves and limited hours due to collection and drop off.In my organisation, it is these factors that will mean I don’t get that next level of job, not my sex.

I could choose to work full time, nanny-up and my career wouldn’t be affected in the same way. If a had a sahd at home, I’d be fine too. But, I don’t and I now see the men getting the best projects etc which will get them onto the next rung. However, I could choose to work full time but I have currently chosen not to. Until there is a more equal childcare split, there will always be a gender pay gap. Also the method of calculation is too crude. An average can be meaningless.