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?

This is the thing. It bakes in inequality. It affects the trajectory of women's careers and personal wealth.

Each %age uplift, pension contributions, future promotions are downgraded.

I applaud you @ByQuaintAzureWasp that must have been exhausting to keep fighting.

When I look back at my now 35 year career I can see that constant downgrading.

It is scary to think that equal pay came in during my lifetime.

The female CEO of the Co-op was recently on Desert Island Discs. She told a sad tale of miscarriage and infertility before explaining that this was mitigated by using a surrogate.
It made me think that it's not so much 'men versus women' but that candidates were being judged according to their expected expenses in life. A male finance director might be assumed to 'need' money for an expensive car, maintenance for an ex-wife or membership at a posh golf club, a woman in the same role might be expected to drive a cheaper, child-friendly car and spend more time at home.
Sir John Harvey-Jones spent almost all of his business career at ICI, having left the Navy when his daughter was diagnosed with polio. He was asked how much he was looking for and said that he needed £600 per year. As he moved up the company, his pay rises were based on his existing salary and when he joined the board his salary was increased enormously to correct the fact that he was paid less than people three or four rungs below him on the ladder.
He asked if the correction would have ever been made, had he not been promoted to the board - he was told "of course not". He changed that as CEO.

My mum worked for serco a few years ago. The whole dept was made redundant, including the senior manager. He called all the women into his office and said you all need to be aware that the men in the office earn significantly more than each of you despite doing the same job. Do with that info what you will… they spoke to a solicitor and ended up getting pay equalised. Dm had only been there 4 years but one woman got 22 years of back pay! It’s outrageous that it happened in this day and age.

Renegotiate your salary like a man would!

It’s not illegal to pay how they are, particularly where they’ve protected their salary in a redundancy process. I work in logistics and we have drivers making more than their supervisors because drivers are a key resource and we have had to flex pay due to a shortage of drivers out there. The only reason it would be illegal is if they are paying you less because you are female and he is male - they have a legitimate explanation for this in that it was a suitable alternative role during a redundancy process. You could raise a grievance and ask the questions you’ve highlighted on here, ask them to demonstrate and evidence the reasons why they have chosen to pay him more and ask for anonymised data based on sex of salaries for others in the same grade. You could then look to go down the ACAS and tribunal route but you would need to clearly evidence that the reason for the pay disparity is sex and not due to a protected salary from a redundancy process.

This is why we have the equality act. Does your company have to produce a gender pay gap report? I would read a copy if it does and ask to speak to the author. If your line manager is hiding behind HR, it is time for you to approach HR direct, ask for policies and a meeting. It that fails ACAS. This is a bullshit situation.

I would expect the line manager to be at a higher grade with higher pay than those being managed to reflect the additional responsibilities that role has.

However, the company is not obliged to structure things that way and if it wasn’t discussed when you interviewed for the role then clearly they were intending to try to keep costs down by not promoting you.

you may have grounds for some equality complaint as he is a man earning more than you on the same grade for a role with lesser responsibility.

The company I work for has form for promoting people by giving them additional responsibility and promising a pay rise to match “ in the next cycle” which of course never arrives. In one team they did this and then hired new people at a lower band to make sure there was a difference.

You have to keep asking your manager when you will get the pay increase & band promotion to match your new role and it wouldn’t hurt to ask what the complaints process is as you feel you are being discriminated against.

Alternatively start looking elsewhere for a new job.

This makes me so angry. If your manager isn’t doing anything you should ask your HR to review this because there should be a company wide policy about this. I think you should call a labour lawyer or a diversity organisation to ask for their thoughts. Let’s start making changes in society

As an Inspector, his base salary will not be less than a Sergeant. The pay grade is higher. The difference will come in that a Sergeant can work/earn overtime so can end up earning more that way. But the base salary of an Inspector is more.

Public sector has it's issues, but in my sector there are set grades for each job role, so you are all appointed to the same and don't have these issues as you don't negotiate your own pay rise, it's just whatever the next increment is, or whatever the increase is for that grade

It's surprising that so many people are so confidently posting what's allowed and what's not with seemingly nothing behind their assertions.

It's not at all uncommon for 2 people to start in the exact same role, at the same time, and be paid quite differently.

If 2 positions are advertised do you really think they should negotiate with the 2 people they want to appoint and then have to pay them both the higher of the 2 negotiated salaries?

It doesn't matter what age, sex and ethnicity they are, they can each negotiate their own pay, whatever that might be. If the offer is £40-50k, negotiable, and one says "yes!" when offered £40k and the other says "no!" and refuses to settle for less than £50k, then that's just tough luck for the lower paid one.

There is nothing at all wrong with it as long as the employer doesn't use a protected characteristic in determining what the actual pay offer will be for each.

And it doesn't matter which of the 2 has the better qualifications, skills, experience or current salary. It's not up to the employer to ensure the one who negotiated less well doesn't lose out, the candidates own that themselves.

Roles at equal level can start at different salaries for a whole host of reasons. Grade doesn’t equal exact pay down to the penny. He could have been hired because at the time he brought more experience they needed outside of the current role so it was additional skill set. The budget could have been there for both of you but you accepted the first offer, he counter offered it (men are better at this than women generally, that’s a fact. women statistically are more likely to take the first offer.)

IC and Managerial scale are often in different sliding scales too. I’ve been paid more than management before, different responsibilities and pressures. It’s also quite common in my profession (IT) for IC’s to have the ability to be on higher pay than management.

In your shoes I'd be as pissed off as you are for the reasons you give. I would be asking for a pay rise to take me above his pay. And if they refuse I would look for another job!

Role

Rubbish. I started a new job and negotiated a great starting salary which was higher than the men I work with, some of whom who had been there a long time, and some on a higher grade.

People need to stop immediately jumping at discrimination as it’s highly patronising to women.

Were any of these higher paid men reporting to you though?

squeaky wheel gets the oil.make a fuss, do not take this lying down, put everything in writing, no conversations or follow any conversation with an email confirming/clarifying your understanding of the conversation 😉 this is bull, sort it out.

You could fight it on the fact that as a woman you are getting paid less than a man?

Hopefully it's been resolved now one way or another since the issue was 9 months ago.

The bit that seems incredibly dodgy to me is him getting a pay rise to make up for not getting a promotion? Uh, no. At that point the OP’s salary should have increased because of her extra responsibility, but not his. If there is discrimination, that seems to me to be where it’s happened, because clearly there is no work reason for his salary to have increased then and not hers.

Oh, FFS. ZOMBIE THREAD.

Whoops, didn’t realise!