Colleague earning much more, for the same job

[LadyGombrich]

Hello

I work in the public sector. have known for a while, through reliable gossip, that my colleague is earning (much) more than me. But my life has been up and down and I've not done anything about it, couldn't face it.

Background: They were on this higher salary doing a specific job and the post was made defunct because some funding ended.

So they were seconded into our department and stayed on their nice high original salary.

I was then brought in, at a lower salary.

For more than I year we have been doing the exact same job.

Suddenly a couple of weeks ago I decided to speak to my manager about it

Manager said "it's on the radar and the jobs will be aligned at some point" but that there was a restructure happening so this wasn't high on anyone's agenda apart from mine (!)

I asked if that might mean my colleague's pay would go DOWN and the manager said it was unlikely.

I know I need proper advice, I've contacted the union rep, not heard back but my hopes and dreams about a pay rise are running wild now so I thought I'd check the hive mind:

Two questions, for anyone who's been here / understands this stuff

-- maybe the whole secondment thing scuppers my plans?

-- if not, how likely is a BACKDATED payment and where might the back date be (ie. the date I came into post a year ago, or the date I raised it with my manager?)

I will chase the union again this afternoon but I know the rep is rather overworked so not sure when I'll hear back

Thank you!

Are you and your colleague the same sex?

There are laws about discrimination - e.g. the question above about sex - if you can prove that you are paid less because you are female / of a different racial type / disabled etc. then you have a good argument...

otherwise you are going to have to demonstrate that you are doing the identical job bringing the same level of experience etc. That can be challenging because no two people are identical, so there can be reasons for different salaries but the same apparent job...

also - it could be that in their previous job going and their being offered this job that their earlier higher salary has been ring-fenced as they might not have been able to be offered less legally, so they sit on a higher salary, but that is not necessarily discrimination against you - if this is the case then one day through inflation and other increases your salary will match theirs and at that point they come in line and the ring-fencing is removed... but until then, your being on a lower salary might not be discriminatory against you...

i.e. more complex than you think and you don't necessarily have an automatic right to be paid the same amount even if apparently doing the same job.

Is your colleague a man?

The secondment will come into play and they would possibly be able to show that your colleague is effectively being overpaid for their current role.

Have either of you been getting pay increases? It may be that their salary is “protected” aka frozen

I think its time to raise a grievance about being paid less than your colleague. It absolutely carries more weight if they are a different gender to yourself. At least you will get a properly investigated response rather than your manager suggesting they'll "address soon" and if they can't justify it hopefully some actions on what will be done to resolve.

Give some thought to any reasons you can think they would be on a different package to yourself. I'm less clear on public sector rules (maybe find their job evaluation/pay policy) but if somebody has different qualifications or experience that might mean their pay is different even if their duties are the same. Also consider if they were transferred they might be ring fenced for a period of time on that higher legacy salary, but I'd expect those rules to be transparent in a policy somewhere.

At the place I work (private company) if a person is being made redundant and instead accepts a role at a lower level, they keep the salary and benefits (eg company car if they had one) for 2 years. This, in theory, gives them time to move back up to their previous level. If they don’t, then their pay drops to that level at that point and they lose any additional benefits they had.

I also wonder if there is a restructure if your jobs are put at risk, new (and possibly fewer) jobs are created and you are both put at risk of redundancy and maybe you could be redeployed at same salary and higher paid colleague could have to apply for a new role that is lower paid than their current salary

I'm not sure how things work in public roles outside the NHS but if you're in the NHS this could be a number of things.

They could be the same band but at a different pay point in that band due to experience, years in post etc. If their higher band role was made defunct, they may have been moved into a lower band role but given pay protection for two years (paid at their previous salary). In which case, after the two years, they'll move to the lower band pay and be aligned with your salary, although their pay point may be different dependent on experience.

You don't mention sexes here, and notwithstanding discrimination issues, I find situations like this can have the potential to go wrong if not carefully handled (speaking as an employer). It can really change my opinion on an employee based on how they handle this. Many have pointed out already there may be a reason for the legacy salary, but you also don't really know the full situation with their wages - you admit this is based on gossip. For example, have they been getting the same pay rises as you or has their pay remained at a similar level while you have received rises ?

Some food for thought in how you approach this. You mention that you came into post after this person was appointed - surely then you negotiated a salary you were happy with at that time. Why is that different now just because (and you admit this) you have heard gossip that someone else has more ? Why didn't you negotiate for what you felt you were worth at the time - I'm not being goady but maybe the job market was different and rates had come down, maybe your experience and/or qualifications were not as good as other candidates, maybe you didn't interview as well so they were not desperate to attract you with a higher salary ?

There are complicated rules around maintaining someone's wages when there has been a redeployment and/or redundancy situation and neither you, the office gossips nor anyone here, knows enough to advise properly on this point.

I would say that you need to be looking at why you deserve a pay rise from your previously agreed salary, and that is not because someone else may be getting more. You do not get to be any taller by cutting someone else's head off. By that, I mean do not focus too much on your colleague and their wages - focus on you. Have you looked at today's market rate for your role, what experience have you gained in post, what do you do to contribute and add value ? Negotiate properly for your pay rise now - build a business case based on you and not someone else.

I would say however that if there is discrimination at play that is different however it does not automatically follow that if you are female and your colleague is male that there is discrimination.

The normal process for your colleague is that they would have been at risk of redundancy, they were redployed and retain their terms and conditions at least for some defined period - often two years although it can be indefinite.

Based on what you have said, there is no discrimination at play - you are on the "grade for the job" as it currently exists, and their circumstances are entirely irrelevant to that. If the role (not the individual post holders) were regraded, normally any backdating would, as a maximum, be to the date taht it was agreed to regrade the posts. Whether or not the collegaue salary is then harmonised with the new salary depends on the terms of their redeployment and their own terms of employment.

In short, they might stay on their higher salary no matter what, and you could stay on the same salary or a different one. Not to pour cold water on your hopes and dreams of the huge backpay (that you almost certainly won't get!) but have you considered that in this day and age of public sector pay YOUR pay could go down?? Your salary would then be protected in a similar way, depending on the terms that that specific circumstance.

But what they are paid is based on individual employment terms that relate to them and them alone - nothing to do with discrimination and nothing to do with whether or not you get a regrade for the position.

Their roll was made redundant and they were tuped over to a different region. There salary is protected

Way back in the mists of time when I worked for the NHS I was recruited on a grade. Within a few months the department was broken up and I was redeployed to another department to a role which was about 2-3 grades lower. However my grade and pay were 'protected' for a year, after which my pay & grade would have been reduced. So this could be happening with your colleague

Where I work, people are on wildly different salaries for doing exactly the same job. It’s very normal and you can’t raise a grievance. Eg, legacy salaries, terms and conditions, leave allowance, TUPEd staff, etc, etc.

Surely if you are in public sector you are paid on a banding? Does the band accurately correspond to the job you applied for? Are other roles the same as yours paid at the same band?

Your colleagues salary is a red herring since they have been seconded elsewhere probably on a protected salary.

The most likely reason for the pay discrepancy is that the post is graded and evaluated at the lower band. The secondee is working in that role under a protected grade. Depending on the sector protection can be anything up to 5 years. There are two separate things at play. What the salary that should be paid for the role as it is defined. What the person is entitled to be paid following a transfer and reorganisation.

The OP needs to be careful about what she is pushing for here. If the role is regraded upwards she might not be slotted or pooled against it and she would be at risk. A lot depends on the rules of the reorganisation. But job realignment means the JD may change and the OPs current role will not exist.

It's quite common in the public sector (amd elsewhere in large companies) for staff to have "protected pay" when they are forced to take a job at a lower grade because their old job no longer exists.

I don't think the fact that he's paid more under an arrangement like this will help your case for equal pay.

If it did, the only thing that will change is he'll be paid less - it's probably only protected for a fixed term anyway.

Echo what PP have said. Pay protection is very normal and also if they were on secondment then often the terms of the secondment may have been that they are on their original salary.
I think given it's gossip, I'd focus less on the comparator with the individual and focus more on the banding or grading of the job you do. Is the JD accurate, does it cover everything you do?

This is all very helpful -- mostly because it looks like I'm on a hiding to nothing so at least I can curb my fantasies a bit 🫠

I'll see what the union rep says and possibly get some independent advice too.

He is a man, I am a woman.

The "gossip" is extremely reliable and I was told it because the person telling me, thought it was unfair.

Thanks everyone!

If they thought it unfair why didn’t they raise it with management? They were shit stirring and making you their flying monkey.

But OP was also brought in from another department?

He is a man, I am a woman.
Just to be clear, this is not relevant unless the actual reason he is paid more is because he is a man. Which isn't the case. People get very confused with discrimination laws and think that as long as they have a protected characteristic, that means they cannot be treated worse that someone who doesn't have it. That isn't true.

The "gossip" is extremely reliable and I was told it because the person telling me, thought it was unfair.
Of course they did. But since they knew his salary and also must have known why it is higher, they definitely couldn't have been shit-stirring. Gossiping about other peoples salary isn't a nice characteristic.

Yep, I think the others may have got it. You can't really say without knowing the facts but it does sound like he's still getting his original salary, probably on a mark time basis until other salaries catch up or he moves on.

Even without this in the public sector there could be a big gap between entry salary and top of scale, in that situation two people of the same grade could be earning significantly differently due to their years service and place on the pay scale.

This particular case doesn't feel like sexism. As they probably had to keep him on the higher salary

However i feel there is still a lot of sexism in workplaces.

I feel i am treated much worse than the men are treated in my workplace.

Same where I worked but they will be frozen for years until everyone else catches up.