To be upset male colleague is paid much more

[TrixieMixie]

I have an older male colleague who was recruited years ago on a fantastic deal at a time when a lot of money was sloshing round our industry. Back in the day I was young and in a junior position but worked my way up to the point I am at least equal to him in status, responsibility etc. He is well over typical retirement age and has shrunk his role but not his pay which is a multiple of mine. There has been deflation of pay in my industry. I like this man and he has been a mentor to me so I wish him no harm but it feels very unfair to me. I love my job. I’ve raised this with several managers who have agreed it’s not fair but nothing has been done. He shows no sign of retiring despite being in his 70s, why would he as he’s on such a sweet deal. He is valuable to the organisation and makes a good contribution. But I feel like a mug. I don’t think a man in my situation would be expected to put up with it. Any thoughts on what to do to resolve this amicably and not fall out with him or my bosses?

Your company is paying him for his experience perhaps?

YABU to suggest he retire because you think he’s too old. Clearly he is a valued asset to the company.

I'm sorry that you feel this is unfair, however a man in your position would be expected to put up with it. This is likely a matter of contract i.e. his legacy contract has a better wage than your newer contract. They cannot lower his wage to meet yours, and clearly aren't in a position to increase your wage to meet his.

It's not that unusual to have people doing the same job at different wages, particularly if the better paid member of staff has been there a long time.

OP, you're probably best off getting some professional advice from ACAS then you can use that information to help you speak to your employer about your pay. Employers can pay one employee more than another employee based on experience/length of service rather than sex however the argument that it is down to experience/length of service doesn't hold if there is more than around five years difference between your length of service and his.

m.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=4198

But I feel like a mug. I don’t think a man in my situation would be expected to put up with it

Don't be ridiculous. lots of industry's pay less. Lots of people who have been with their company for years and years have better contracts.

You are paid less because you joined the company later than him, wages arent as generous and he has lots of experience 9n you.

It will not impact you one way or another if he retires. They wont give you more. They wont give you more because someone has a better idea.

If you want a pay increases then you negotiate it based on you. Not on someone else, who has ko resemblance to your situation

You are right that pay scales particularly when there is no clear system for review and advancement tend to be unfair to women/ coincidentally pay women a lot less than men for work - more than enough evidence to demonstrate this across industries and in terms of what's given when women try and negotiate salary.

From what i have seen in these situations inertia takes over. They are unlikely to review your pay unless you come back with an alternative job offer or actually leave and then come back later.

You can try some more hard ball attempts at negotiation but you would probably find it more effective to look for other work.

It’s the same for me in public sector.

Pay restructuring just before I got promoted mean I get paid £ks less than colleagues at the same grade as me doing the same job. It’s shite, especially as until this year we’ve not had yearly rises that come even close to inflation but I’m not sure what you can do other than keep persisting with trying to negotiate a better deal for you (I can’t bring public sector)

Are you content with what you earn if this guy wasn’t in the equation?

Next time you raise it, take notes, a recording or a union rep. They obviously don't think you are serious about it, so you have to show that you are. Make it worth their while to change it so they don't have to give you the back pay for the whole time you have been in the role. Frankly, even if it becomes a bad atmosphere at least you are likely to be paid better in your next job as past salary is often taken into account.

Sexism and Ageism are both abhorrent.

Thanks for the responses. I mentioned his age because the fact he took his job so long ago on a gilt-edged contract is one reason, the main one, why he’s paid much more. I’m now very experienced in my own right and have skills he hasn’t, however. A few people have suggested his retirement as a ‘solution’ which is why I mentioned it. I don’t want him to retire as I like him and as one person said it wouldn’t help me if he did - they are not going to pay me his salary no matter what. The unfairness is that our roles have shifted. I have been given a lot of his former responsibilities and am technically his boss though it doesn’t feel like it. I was given a pay rise when that happened but he is paid vastly more. Not just a few grand but a multiple. I think his salary should have adjusted when his responsibilities were reduced - his job has shrunk considerably but his pay has not reflected this.Our industry is full of male egos, I am a minority as a woman and I genuinely don’t think they would put a man in my situation,
I can see the reasons and I guess I just feel resentful and jealous nonetheless to be blunt about it., We both bought new cars recently. His was a Porsche and mine was a Fiat Cinquecento second hand!

DM is in this situation in that she has worked for the same company for nearly 25 years now, she has a much more favourable contract, pension terms and conditions etc than newer staff. This one isn't about gender, his contact is just a legacy from a time with more money. If you feel you are underpaid for the role you now do, that's for you to negotiate, it's not about his salary.

It depends on contracts, I was given a hefty promotion three years ago, I then had to drop down to a four day week and drop some of my responsibilities, however as I had been employed before we had a change of contract my payscale couldn’t be lowered for at least four years. Where as if a newer member of staff had done the same their pay would have been lowered after six months.

I would expect a senior colleague to earn more than me, even if they did less than me, after all you pay more for more experience.

Why are there always people on these threads falling over themselves to justify unequal treatment, even where the OP’s work have told her it’s unfair? Why is it almost always men that get paid more than women, yet some daft women will always, no matter what, justify it as “they must be better at their job than you”? Despite having had legislation in place for almost 50 years there are still women getting paid less than men for no other reason than their sex.

There may well be a legitimate reason for the pay differential, but based on what the OP has said it’s at least worth exploring. Get some proper legal advice OP on whether you could have an equal pay claim. As for how to do it without hacking them off, well I’m not sure you can, given you’ll be effectively accusing them of sex discrimination so I guess it depends on whether you can take that or not.

It's not about falling over themselves to justify it.

He started there when wages were far more generous. That's the main reason he is paid more.

This happens to both men and women. In a massive uk company I worked for, the men and women who had been there 20 plus years, didnt have to work bank holidays, were paid substantially more, even more than their managers if the managers had joined after them. Over the years the wages have been less generous, perks have been too. People who have been there 20 plus have the best one, 10 plus isnt as good but better than people who joined in the last year.

The company has no obligation to pay them less because the pp is his manager and a woman. When he reduced his duties, they didnt look at reducing his wages.

He and the OP are in different positions. Other peoples wages do not automatically mean yours should be a certain amount. Especially when the situations are so different.

The OP says herself that wages arent as generous as they were when he started.

If a man joined the company when the pp did and was in the exact same situation, I believe he would be still getting paid less than this man.

If OP wants a pay rise, she needs to concentrate on yourself, not saying 'well this man who worked here from the year dot gets more so I want more'. That's not how you negotiate a pay rise.

Move on if it bothers you that much is my advice.

From the ACAS link I posted upthread:

It's particularly difficult for employers to justify a pay gap if the difference in experience or service between parties is based on a period spanning more than five years, and there could be an increased risk of indirect age discrimination against younger claimants as well.

I really would call them to discuss it, OP. They will tell you if you have a case for an equal pay claim and, if you do, will be able to support you in making it.

Or maybe you’re expected to put up with it because you have? Go and find another job and tell them to their give you a pay rise or loose you.

It sounds like he's paid more because of circumstance, not because he's male. You said so yourself - he started working years ago when there was more money in the industry, and presumably as he has so much experience and years of loyal service they don't expect him to take a pay cut.

You have said so yourself that there is less money in the industry these days. It sounds almost like you want a payrise just so your salary matches his (which obviously isn't possible as there's less money in the industry), and it sounds like you almost want him to retire JUST so he isn't getting more money than you anymore? What other reason do you have for your comment about him not being close to retiring 🤔

The company probably figured he's been with them for so many years and won't be with them much longer so hardly fair to give him a big pay cut right before retirement.

Honestly, you're just jealous. And I would be too. But it's not as unfair as you're making out. It can be seen that he's being paid for his experience, of which he has many years. He's even been your mentor! Give the poor man a break and let him enjoy his last few years before retirement without trying to sabotage and get him a pay cut out of jealousy.

Your title is misleading as it makes it sound like he's getting paid more because he is make, which obviously isn't the case. You shouldn't really know his salary to be honest and it's a bit awkward and unprofessional for you to keep banging on about it (which from your OP it sounds like you've been doing)

If you had started the job around the same time then you would have some comeback but I'm afraid in this situation there isn't much you can do. The company had different t's&c's by the time you started.
It's not nice and I get that it's frustrating though.

I work in finance and this is rife. The men I work with closely have mentioned their salary to me before, and it is between 2k and 6k per annum more than me. And I do the same bloody job! Myself and a couple of female colleagues spoke about this recently amongst ourselves and are bloody disgusted by the pay gap.

From your description, pay has generally dropped since his was set, you're not underpaid, he's overpaid. If the company were willing and able to correct the disparity properly, they would cut his pay rather than raise yours. So I don't think you can really expect your pay to match his.

The value of an employee changes with time. Even if what they do doesn't change, the potential cost of getting newer employees to do it can be higher or lower. Where it's higher, it's reasonable for the existing employee to get a pay-rise to take their salary to market-rates. But I think it's legally impractical for employers to cut salary when someone becomes overpaid, so they just have to put up with it.

Those of you who are saying he's paid more for his years of experience, the OP said she also now has years of experience! In teaching, you start on the same pay point - M1- and this increases up to M6. After that, unless you look at a UPS or a leadership role, your pay doesn't increase apart from via inflation pay rises. So, if teacher A started work in 2000 they would be on M6 by 2006. If teacher B starts in 2006, by 2012 both would be on the same salary.
The private sector should work in the same basis. If the OP isn't being given incremental annual pay increases yet is expected to do more of the same work as her colleague, then this could be ascribed to discrimination on the basis of sex.
Some years ago, Local Authorities landed a hefty pay debt as it was shown they were paying male employees much more than female ones. The women got their pay increased and back paid, rather than the men getting a pay cut.

It's particularly difficult for employers to justify a pay gap if the difference in experience or service between parties is based on a period spanning more than five years

I don't understand this and wonder whether ACAS is right. If X has one year's experience whilst Y has ten years' experience, surely it's very easy indeed to justify a pay gap between them?

Companies justify this stuff, with all of the excuses about old deals, new contract etc, but I bet you there are a disproportionate amount of men on the better contracts. This data is emerging everywhere. It’s soul destroying to feel devalued, and there’s a weird prisoners dilemma where most women try and justify why this is ok.

Soontobe60 its not just about years of service. Which he will always have more than OP, because of his age.

But because he joined the company when the pay was more generous. By the ops own admission. Anyone who worked there when contract and pay was better, will be paid more than someone who joined later.

Age discrimination is actually more difficult. ACAS would need to prove that he OP is paid less purely down to age.

Its not it's because the industry doesnt pay the same wages now.

It's not illegal to decide new starters will have had a different wage to someone who start 5/10/15 years before.