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?

Contact your Union and ask for advice.

I don't see this as a sex equality thing, it's timing. I used to work in a private school where the remuneration package for staff had been changed 5 years previously. Staff with contracts from before the change got free education for their children, a perk worth £40k before tax per child. Those employed after the change got a 25% discount after they'd been employed 2 years. A colleague doing a similar job to me had 4 kids, so he was effectively being paid £160k a year more than me, for having been in the job a few years longer (both on approximately £40k salaries). I couldn't afford the fees even with the discount, so my kids went to state school.

Obviously it rankled but I understood why the governors and bursar made the change, to avoid the school going bust, and I understood they couldn't take away benefits from pre existing staff. We were just either side of a shift in the industry.

I would also be cheesed off. Tell them you are not happy and if nothing happens move to another company and negotiate more.

Soontobe60
Not automatically anymore in teaching though and there's no pay portability. Schools can pay new staff what they like as long as it's within the pay range, which is much more like the private sector.

I think the OP needs to make the case when it's her review that her pay needs to reflect the increased responsibilities and have concrete examples of how her role and responsibilities has changed and her pay hasn't kept up with it. She's more likely to get a review of pay that way than saying 'but he gets paid more and I don't think it's fair' because that route has got her 'we recognise it's not fair but we can't do anything'.

Ha Ha! yes of course I am bloody jealous, I'm not a saint!

To the person who said I shouldn't know his pay: The reason I know his pay is that I am his manager so I run the budget of the department.

I agree, the company probably think he is about to retire so they are not tackling it for that reason, as he is in his seventies now.

However, as I am friendly with him I know because he has told me that he has no intention of retiring and that the situation could carry on for many years. I am conflicted because I really do like him, he is a friend and I enjoy working with him - but this is not a satisfactory situation for me.

His salary also affects my ability to hire or replace staff as there is very little money left in the pot after he has been paid.

Regardless of his greater experience, he isn't better at his job than I am. And there is definitely nothing in his contribution to justify a 2.5x multiple to my salary.

I think I agree with the people saying the only thing to do is move on. Which is a shame as I love my job.

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?

It can only be justified where pay progression exists and it is, in theory, achievable for the lower paid member of staff to eventually attain the same level of pay as the higher paid member of staff.

Where DH works he earns more than some of the people on his team but he has been there for 15 years, has had two promotions in that time, and is now at the top of his pay scale. Anyone starting today and doing the same job as him would be at the bottom of the pay scale for that role so doing the same job as he is but for less money, however they will progress up the scale and once they reach the top of it they will be on the same salary as him.

The law requires equal pay for jobs of equal worth. If your job is as responsible, if you work at same level of decision making, if you manage same number of same level people and report to same level of manager, you probably have a claim.
www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/equal-pay-equal-work-what-law-says

CherryPavolva - all of the above. In fact I manage more people and have more responsibility!

There is a huge caveat in the equal pay for equal work.

Especially when the industry used to pay more. All the company has to do is prove the reason he is paid more, is that industry wages were alot higher when he started.

Companies can change pay grades and starter wages

This is nothing to do with him being male of OP being female or the experience really. He was recruited in a time where there was more cash to splash. The problem is that he’s managed to palm off responsibilities (and some to OP) but his wages haven’t gone down. This is the bit I’m struggling with!

Are you at a university?! It's full of older male professors who came in many many years ago on sweet deals (even 7/8 years ago) and are sitting it out to retirement and beyond on huge salaries. Some work very very hard, run research groups, bring in money, some...don't. They do the minimum teaching and travel a lot for no apparent reason. Does it peeve me that I'm doing the same amount as some of these individuals (men) for literally half or less of the pay> Yes, enormously. But they are almost never managed out, they just sit there enjoying the fruits of their earlier labour (most were very good when younger, just can't be bothered now) and making the whole thing top heavy. Most of the professors would not get professorships now, or even get promoted if they had to work under the very strict promotion criteria we are subjected to. It is unfair, the unions are vaguely involved, but the sector has a long history of not making people leave (with a few notable exceptions which is why the other unis don't do it) and so we all just plod along, with them flying off to nice places and chuckling all the way to the bank.

It is to do with them being male, they were fortunate enough to secure their positions when there was more money but now don't want to revisit this in any form to even things up for women or minorities (there is a huge issue with non-UK nationals propping up research and teaching at the lower levels at unis). All attempts to try to get them to behave properly are futile (ours have survived accusations of racism and sexual harassment). They are wealthy, privileged and litigious so no one really fancies asking them to leave or even do more. It is about being male, the women in our department have been harangued by management to do more, teach more, take on more and many of them men at the same level or less are allowed to take extensive leave just to get rid of them!

I totally understand your frustration (used to work in the City).

I once tried to get salary parity but stuffed it up as they basically told me that I was only worth what somebody was prepared to pay me and that they were not prepared to pay me more as they didn't care if I left but that they didn't want him to leave.

I had no choice but to leave.

So before you talk to them, do a lot of research. Get in touch with a lot of agencies. It will mean that when you do approach them you'll be like a bloodhound with a genuine scent of more money. I went in with an ASK mentality.

I would get some specialist advice from ACAS/an employment lawyer. You may need to act now before he retires.

I'm in a similar situation. I accepted a job on a decent/normal salary. The other people in my office on a level management position or who manage less people are all paid more. They are all men, not that this has anything to do with it. They've all been there a lot longer and from when times were lucrative. I do feel bitter though.

I wouldnt bother with the union or ACAS. You need another job offer-a good one. Slap that on the table and tell them you want to accept it simply because it pays way more.
Hopefully they will not want to lose you and will match it. If they don't then you might be better off moving.You often kind of have to force the issue with pay.
And yes, he had a better contract back in the day blah blah blah, but if he was an woman in her 70s does anyone seriously beleive he would still be there, sitting pretty and raking it in??
Nah!

Very interesting contributions re the universities. I don't want to say what sector I am in but the situation is similar. I think it is to do with him being male because no woman would have been able to get into the position he is in at the time. Women were not promoted to his/my level 25 years ago, at least not in my organisation. There are no older women in our organisation at all - I am viewed as an older woman myself and am in my 40s - the women get driven out long before they are in their seventies! I like having him around and I don't want to 'spoil his final years before he retires', but I don't think questioning the vast excess over my pay is wrong. I am paid less than half what he earns for doing the same or more responsible job!!! It makes no sense for them to placate him at the expense of losing me because I will always be cheaper and- possibly - have more years to offer. If I leave they will have to replace me and I dare say whoever they appoint will feel exactly as I do.

And yes, he had a better contract back in the day blah blah blah, but if he was an woman in her 70s does anyone seriously beleive he would still be there, sitting pretty and raking it in??

Yes because I know loads of women that are doing right now.

One of my colleagues went part time and is still on more than colleagues who recently joined the company and are in the same grade as her. Plus she now gets overtime/lieu days if she does extra hours. Where she didnt when she was full time salaried. She does an extra day a week, lost weeks as her kids are older and in school.

It's not that uncommon for women who have always worked and been in the same company for a long time.

TrixieMixie the fact that women, in your sector didnt get promoted 25 years ago, doesnt mean you are now paid less because you are a woman.

You are paid less because he got a lucrative contract and you didnt, down to the coinates at the time you both started.

The fact that he didnt get a reduction in wage, may lead to something if you can prove that they would reduce your wage based on the fact that you are female.

How many years Experience does he have Versus yours?

Benchmark is against other similar roles. If you go elsewhere will you see a significant pay increase? If so, then move on. Generally you increase your salary more that way. If not, then as you say, the industry isn’t paying as well as it was and you have to accept it. They can’t just reduce his salary due to industry changes unless he is clearly now in a different less senior role?

This has nothing to do with male/female.

I was appointed a mere 3 years ago on my salary. Since my role has had some changes made to it, the starting salary is now approx 1/5th less than what I am paid. My maternity cover has been appointed on that lower salary. He's male. I'm female.

This has happened because I have been salary protected.

This happens often. His terms and conditions he was appointed on cannot be any less favourable than they were when appointed.

No, salary protection does not count as a valid reason in equal pay claims. You simply need a comparator doing equal work for more pay. The only way to address is is likely to be on grounds of sex discrimination. A man doing lesser work is paid more; the history is irrelevant.

At a previous job, a woman there was working at the lowest grade and only parttime hours and she got paid more than fhe supervisors and management did.

It was all due to weird old contracts and previous company buyouts and mergers etc so noone could do anything about it. She loved it and we were totally envious

No, salary protection does not count as a valid reason in equal pay claims. You simply need a comparator doing equal work for more pay.

I have known lots of people trying to make the case that employees who have been at company longer shouldnt have better terms or pay.

Unfortunately, all were advised they didnt have a case. The 2 who pursued it lost

Because the companies can prove both were employed at standard rates for the industry at the time they were employed. And both have had increased pay in line with industry norms.

Unless you can prove sex is the factor that decided the payment terms, its not sex discrimination.

Here we have.

The man was employed when wages were considerably higher

He has worked for them for longer, which often counts for something. In lots if companies, people get more holidays for long service.

He negotiated to reduce his responsibility but maintain his wage. The employer may have had very good reasons for this, that have nothing to do with sex.

Companies can employ people on different contracts. They cant if it based on sex. But they can, because the industry pays less now than it did back then.

The OP would need to prove the decision to keep himno his wage is based on him being a man. Not based on him being a long standing employee.

If it was simply equal pay for equal work, then most companies that now pay less than they did 20 years ago would all be breaking employment law. But they arent.

The back ground is relevant.