Direct report makes more than me

[houwseevryweekend]

Me and my direct report both started in at the same time for the company - we were doing the same role, both the same grade, same skills, same job, same department.

Company then made our role redundant and split the job grade into 2 different roles - with one role managing the other. We both had to interview for the role we wanted, both went for the line manager role - I got it, he didn't so I became his manager.

We've now had our salary review and because I'm his boss, noticed that not only did he get a higher % salary increase than me, his total salary is 4k higher than mine! I've spoken to my boss who hadn't realised (we're a big team) but tried to explain it saying that because he started on a higher salary than me, and they gave him a higher pay rise (to make up not getting the promotion...) - his base is now more than mine. She was non committal about resolving it. Just said to leave it with her.

What's worse is I'm also responsible for hiring more people at my grade and because they're external, they're all at a higher pay. Which pisses me off too but I understand externals get more.

However, AIBU to expect to be paid more than the person I'm managing if we both interviewed for the role and I have more budget and responsibilities and a much bigger team?

Just wondering what my options are: can HR do something like this? Feels like a pretty big issue but I don't know enough whether it's also a legal issue?

Why would it be a legal issue? What law are you thinking it falls under?

It's entirely legal, unless you're claiming discrimination. You can only keep bugging your manager and/or look elsewhere to either leave, or to demonstrate that you are under-paid and to negotiate up. Clearly there is budget available, if you're hiring people on more; so pester power, or leaving, will be your best options.

I don’t think it’s a legal issue but it would piss me off enough to threaten to leave if they didn’t pay me more!

I had a colleague that was fuming once because she wasn't paid as much as her counterpart. When we asked her what she asked for when she started (she was happy to take the lower band pay because she was so keen for the job and thought it gave her the edge) and what she asks for at pay reviews, she said she never argued what was being offered as it seemed reasonable... so she only had herself to blame. An employer isn't NOT going to pay out to your colleagues because "it might not be fair on so and so in the department". However, your employer should have been clever and ensured that you were not handling your colleagues pay paperwork.

I'd push back and say that unless you get more than him, you will consider leaving the job, it's time to play hardball. You can clearly demonstrate that you have more skills and more responsibility so why are they not paying you more than what they can clearly afford, for a lesser member of staff.

As far as hiring new external people that will get paid more, is this because they are self employed contractors? If yes, then they are usually paid more and its unreasonable to think you should get their wage.

I earn more as an annual salary than the people I manage, but that's because I work more hours. They are on higher hourly rate than I am, and rightly so; their job is far more challenging than mine.

Presumably you were happy with your salary/had the opportunity to negotiate etc. before you found out about his?

Equal Pay Act anyone.

Paying a man more than a woman for previously doing the same job and now doing a more junior job is sex discrimination.

Speak to HR and ask about the process for formally having your salary and job evaluated.

Don't just 'leave it' with your manager.

If no joy with HR call ACAS for advice on what to do next.

I was an external consultant once and was hired temporarily to manage a team through a tough transition. It was such a difficult role and I had no support. By accident, I find out that one of the (not very good) men in my team ( or reporting to me) earned 20% more than me. I was so shocked I left a voicemail for my boss saying that we had to have a serious talk. I got an immediate 10% rise with the promise of another boost in 6 months.

it wasn’t enough though, it was the principle, so I looked elsewhere and got a 60% pay rise when I went external.

it’s always men who somehow earn more than women, and I wanted to vote with my feet. Go external , take this as the sign.

This is commonplace.

A friend once had this in her role - the org did a pay review and the women (as always this) got large pay rises and I believe back pay

This

Because this was done as part of a re-structure, we were told no changes to contract terms so no I wasn't expecting a pay rise. However, his role externally is advertised on a lower pay banding than mine so clearly there is a difference in how HR see the pay bands and seniority. They just didn't communicate that to me or make the changes internally.

The legal question was whether I could launch a formal grievance if they refuse to increase it. Because to be interviewed for a role and getting promoted over my direct report because I was more qualified yet getting paid less has to be some kind of discrimination ? If they're advertised on different pay bands externally, don't they have to match internally? Trying to understand HR's objectives here.

I don't understand why they would do it tbh - we are a company where there's fixed grades for promotion. What's the point of a promotion if you earn less than people you got promoted over..?

My dh earns less than some of his direct reports.

When I worked for the same company, I earned more than blokes doing the same job as I was externally recruited for a roll. It was a team of 22 and they had all been asked to do the roll I took, none of them wanted to as it meant travelling all of 10 miles from the office.
Oh, how bitter were they when they realised the customer paid for travel 🤣
A few of them tried to muscle in on the contract but weren't successful.

Discussing salaries in that company was frowned upon, probably because they varied wildly for the same roll. It was an IT service provider.

We do the exact same job and skill set. Its not one of those where one is technical and the other just line management: It's more senior because I am more experienced in what he does so need to QA his work, deal with escalations, along with other responsibilities and line management. That's why I got the job and he didn't.

Difference here is we are both internal and went for the same job which I got and he didn't. Don't want to give details of my job as niche/outing but it's like my DH as Inspector makes less than a Sergeant - both do the same job and skills but an Inspector has additional responsibilities.

Oh I only know his salary because I'm his line manager and HR need me to tell him his new salary! We don't discuss salaries here either.

Sounds like a potential equal pay claim to me. If OP is a woman and line report is a man and the job roles are identical apart from the fact that OP's role also includes line management responsibilities, I'd be surprised if a tribunal didn't see that as pay discrimination.

What about when a woman gets paid more than a man for doing the same (or a more senior) job, is that discrimination?

It is discrimination if the reason someone gets paid less is due to their sex or other protected characteristic. It is not discrimination just because someone gets paid less.

OP, you can launch a formal grievance, but that is not a "legal" question - you could launch a formal grievance over anything. Provided there is no discrimination - and you have not suggested that there is - then the company can offer you what it likes; it's up to you whether you accept it or go elsewhere.

The problem is that you were happy with your salary before you found out his; it's not clear from your posts if you are under-paid or he is over-paid. But again, there's nothing illegal about paying over/under pay bands, or new hires being paid more than others - "is it legal" is the wrong question. You can be unhappy regardless... However realistically, you're more likely to get more if you leave (or at least get an offer elsewhere to use as leverage).

This is likely to be an equal pay issue particularly because your line manager has given the reason that he started on a higher salary than you (at the same time in the same role) which has then impacted your salary down the line. There may be nuances eg particular skills he has that you don’t where they are able to justify it, however on the face of it he’s been doing “like work” to you on a higher rate of pay which is now having an impact on this restructure.
I would speak to your HR department and explain you think this may be an equal pay issue. As an HR Director this situation would give me shivers, we’ve paid loads of back pay to similar situations to women in my current org based on decisions like this made before I started. I can’t believe people are questioning “what law” it would come under. Of course it’s a legal issue and they need to justify it.

It doesn’t sound right that you’re a higher grade and are earning less so I’d definitely keep pushing it with your manager. I’m a civil servant so we have pay grades here, I wouldn’t be impressed if I was more senior, QA’ing their work, and earning less. Definitely not

Yes it is the same situation when a man gets paid less for doing like work if there’s no justification for it, why wouldn’t it be?
It doesn’t need to be obvious direct discrimination for a tribunal to find an equal pay issue. See Samira Ahmed vs BBC.

It is discrimination if the reason someone gets paid less is due to their sex or other protected characteristic. It is not discrimination just because someone gets paid less.

It’s very hard to evidence intent though, I’d be making a formal grievance asking why a junior staff member was being paid more and let them explain the rationale in writing. Then I’d move to an equal pay claim - particularly if you have clear salary scales and pay points there’s no reason for someone junior being paid more than you but let them dig their own hole first.

I don’t think it’s correct that the equal pay act requires you to be paid less because you are a woman, I believe it requires men and women to be paid the same for doing the same work. Employers need to be careful paying men more than women because they negotiate a higher salary. OP you absolutely have a claim under the Equal Pay Act so I would have a catch up with your boss about a week after you mentioned it and then if you don’t get a suitable response I would raise a grievance.

You're missing the point, which is they both started out doing identical jobs, and the man was paid more. The OP was promoted, and the man is still being paid more.

OP needs to start with getting the employer to justify why the man was paid more for the initial role, and why his (apparently conciliatory) payrise was higher than hers and she still earns less than him.

They can normally wave you away and say 'he had more experience that we valued in x for the original role), but I'm not sure how they can justify the entire sequence of events - especially if it's true that the higher pay rise was 'to make up not getting the promotion'. Essentially that means that he's been rewarded more for not being good enough to promote, and OP has been financially penalised for being better at her job. They'd have to spell it out to her that she'd have been better off being mediocre and not promoted!

Agree with @Sparklfairy .

It might be helpful to read through this and talk to acas before you speak to HR @houwseevryweekend
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/guidance/equal-pay#:~:text=If%20a%20woman%20proves%20that,cause%20the%20difference%20in
I'm guessing you don't have a union?

It's now part of the Equality Act 2010 but it's the same.

If you were paid less than him in the previous role you've a claim for that if you did the same thing.

The claim is for like work, work of equal value or work rated equivalent under a job evaluation scheme.

It's all based on earners of different sex so you couldn't rely on a higher paid woman but you can rely on a higher paid man

Make a good note of your conversation with your boss asap

You can send an equal pay questionnaire rather than raising a grievance that might focus their minds a bit.

You could ask ACAS for some free advice or go to an employment law solicitor.

OP they're definitely on shaky grounds wrt an equal pay claim if your jobs are of equal value and you're a line manager on top.

Do you have an established pay scale/grade structure? It would normally be the case that management responsibilities add at least one grade to a job description so if the people doing the job are on grade A with pay scale X then their managers who are broadly doing the same job but are also responsible for supervision to ensure throughput/quality etc are on grade B with pay scale Y, which would typically be at least 5/10% higher.

So that's what you want - you want to be paid more than this man because you're doing the same job, with the same amount of experience and you're supervising him, or else you'll talk to your union or ACAS about an equal pay claim. Or look for another job. Do you have other reports than him and do you know what they're paid?