Gender pay gap

[FlyTipper]

The world divides into two: those who believe a gender pay gap exists, and those who don't.

Those who don't say women are doing different jobs. They are working part-time, prioritising home/family, do not want the high level responsibility and work load associated with high profile jobs. Thus women choose lower paid jobs because they prefer the conditions.

Those who believe it exists say two people presenting the same show or headlining the same film should be paid the same but clearly are not.

My position: women do different work and this largely explains the observed pay gap. But where the world is set up for men to succeed, women have to pick up the 'crumbs' they can. SO the pay gap doesn't truly exist, but that isn't because of women's choice.

As befits my character, I like to have my views tested. DO you agree?

Yes I’m also talking about equal pay for equal jobs.

And telling you that I’ve seen several situations and actually challenged them where a man and a woman have been hired at the same time with the man offered more than the woman. Despite the woman holding a PhD and the man not, despite far better references for the women and despite experience levels and previous performance levels being higher for the woman. And retrospectively the woman outperforming the man to the tune of tens of millions of dollars of contracts brought in in one case.

I’ve also seen men with lower performance scores give higher bonuses and increments than women. Same job, similar qualifications, similar experience levels: men actively performing worse but rewarded more. Justification ‘he has a family.’ So did the woman and both their spouses worked too.

It happens. It’s not the sole driver of the gender pay gap - that’s been discussed at length previously. But it happens. I’ve seen in happen pencils has worked across industries where it happens. I can only tell you what I’ve experienced directly which is that in organisations with no public pay spine structure, predominantly private ones, same job, same level, different pay occurs.

I’ve worked in several different countries. The only one I’ve seen it at a very low frequency was a Scandinavian country. The UK was / is quite bad for it.

Why do you think so many private companies have rules on not discussing salaries?

e.g. Higher performance, ability output etc

In all the cases I’ve challenged the woman was the higher performer - that was what allowed me to be confident of challenge and success. You need concrete metrics to be able to make a challenge of this kind.

"Yes I’m also talking about equal pay for equal jobs.

And telling you that I’ve seen several situations and actually challenged them where a man and a woman have been hired at the same time with the man offered more than the woman"

As I said last night at 2045

"When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears"

www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/08/01/are-women-paid-less-than-men-for-the-same-work

This was based on "data for 8.7m employees worldwide", gathered by the international Head-Hunters Korn Ferry.

So data on 8.7m employees says the pay gap "almost disappears" at the same job.

But @bowelofbabelfish says differently because in his/her personal experience she alleges that some men she knew got paid more than women she knew for doing the same job.

What do you think is more compelling evidence?

What do you think most neutrals would be persuaded by?

Reminder:

Did Munroe Bergdorf get paid the same as Cheryl for their loreal campaign?

Can Munroe charge/ask more for her time now she has a bigger profile

Is it fair that the Victoria's Secret Angels get paid more for their annual show than the non angels?

If Jane sells 10 TVs a week at Currys, is never late and Bob only sells 5 TVs and is hungover every Sunday then is Jane entitled to ask for a raise at the end of the year?

What about if Bob sorts his performance out and does just as well as Jane, then Jane gets an offer of a 20% pay rise to go work for a competitor. Are Currys entitled to match that offer and put Jane further ahead if Bob for doing the same job?

Kate Moss said she didn't get out of bed for less than £10k. Could those companies that hired her of got someone for cheaper/less to do the same job? But they wanted Kate Moss - why?

Man asks question - have you seen x happen?
Woman answers - yes I have seen x happen
Man dismisses woman’s answer as irrelevant. Gives many irrelevant examples.

I think what happens here is you carry on denying what I’ve told you I’ve seen until I capitulate or you feel you’ve won the argument, is that correct? My disagreement with you is some kind of direct offence to your Male rightness?

Almost is not total is it? The data you cite still shows a difference? Yes? Then some places are still paying men more than woman for the same job. I’ve seen men be paid more at several places ive worked. You asked if anyone had seen this. I answered yes.

I’m not entirely sure what Kate Moss’s contract has to do with my line of work, nor any of the other examples you give.

The other way of looking at it is that you're dismissing data collected on 8.7m employees in favour of your anecdotal experience:

The anecdotal fallacy is widely known, it's not my fault you aren't aware of the concept (despite me linking it last night)

"You used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.

It's often much easier for people to believe someone's testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more 'abstract' statistical reality.

Example: Jason said that that was all cool and everything, but his grandfather smoked, like, 30 cigarettes a day and lived until 97 - so don't believe everything you read about meta analyses of methodologically sound studies showing proven causal relationships."

yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal

"
I’m not entirely sure what Kate Moss’s contract has to do with my line of work, nor any of the other examples you give."

Because there are lots of legitimate reasons why someone doing the same job might be paid more than a colleague.

And funnily enough here's a quote from Jameela Jamil on the BBC today:

""I feel very comfortable asking my co-stars what they earn," she said.

"There is a pay gap between Ted Danson and Kristen Bell - but he was in Cheers, he is a national treasure. It's not just about gender, that's about what you bring to the table." www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-44084773

Because there are lots of legitimate reasons why someone doing the same job might be paid more than a colleague.

And plenty which aren't so legitimate. It's amazing how fiercely men argue to excuse discrepancies in pay stats. This is one of the reasons there is a gender pay gap, because so many men aren't prepared to engage with it - particularly those who have some ability to help change it, because they are in roles where they have a say over payrises and bonuses.

Because there are lots of legitimate reasons why someone doing the same job might be paid more than a colleague.

Oh yes there are. Differences in performance for example. Higher appraisal scores. Higher contract values brought in in the business development team for example. Or being hired at a higher rate due to higher qualifications/ experience/ performance in previous role.

Can you tell me why a man, performing worse across all objective, measurable scores, or a man with lower qualifications worse references, and lower performance in previous role should be paid more than a woman with higher qualifications/ refs/ performance? In a company with guidelines on pay vs performance?

Why should a man objectively performing worse on all scores be paid more than a woman?

"I'm steered by evidence and facts, not what I want to believe, a difficult concept for most people here"

Could you be any more obtuse?

I’m a scientist so I’m firmly in the evidence camp myself. I’ve seen this happen in multiple companies I’ve worked in so yes, I believe it’s an issue.

Why should a man performing worse, or with worse qualifications, references etc be paid more than a woman?

fmsfms The raw data shows a disparity, different interpretations of that data attempt to explain that discrepancy. Those interpretations of said data are not the objective truth of the data. Such is often more complex than that. I’ve seen Jordon Peterson make that very case. The most you can do here is to offer additional insights and assert it’s not all based on sexism, and if you restricted yourself to making that claim I’d back you.

However you are arguing that sexism has absolutely nothing to do with the disparity. Which is as absurd as saying sexism is the only reason. Bowlofbabelfish not that my opinion matters but for what it’s worth it’s good work you are doing, I accept your experience and have respect for what you are doing to correct for it.

Sometimes these stories get sensationalised in the media which is really unhelpful and lead us down the garden path. Chris Pratt getting paid more than his female lead in the next Jurassic movie, yet he was paid less than Jessica Lawrence in Passengers as she was the bigger star.

However when it comes to sport and entertainment I don’t think the answer that on average male athletes and actor/ presenters are bigger draws actually stands up as that in and of itself reveals a culture wide bias against women and female achievements. To say nothing that as women age they are put out to pasture far earlier than men on average when it comes to jobs in the public eye.

I’m obviously not a feminist but shit like that would piss me off if the situation was reversed. Can you not find yourself in possession of a quantum of empathy to that fact?

You're a scientist, yet the concept of "anecdotal fallacy" seems to be going right over your head?

""When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears. This was based on data for 8.7m employees worldwide, gathered by the international Head-Hunters Korn Ferry."

Reminder: pointing out that on average men are taller than women is not saying that no women are taller than men.

Point: pointing out that based on 8.7m employees the pay gap for the same jobs in the same company "almost disappears" is not saying that no/some women are not paid less than men for the same jobs in the same companys.

The majority data/outcome is more compelling than the minority of cases. Besides, there are legal avenues the minority of women affected by unequal pay for same jobs can pursue

The fact that there is even legal redress and avenues to pursue is additional labour that must be performed to correct the problem. People don’t just make complaints to employment tribunals press a button and everything magically gets made better. It reveals we are on a course of correction not in fact that the problem is corrected.

You asked if anyone had seen this happen.

I responded with yes, I had seen this happen.

You requested anecdote

I provided anecdote

and am now being accused of anecdata.🤦🏻‍♀️

For the final time: the causes of the sex pay gap are multiple and complex. Many causes are social and structural. One cause among many others is indeed same job different pay. I provided the answer to your ‘has anyone actually seen this happen’ question. With yes. I have.

Then you start banging on about anecdata, when you asked for anecdata.

Man denies x ever happens ever anywhere in any known universe
Woman says actually she has seen it happen
Man asks for an example
Woman gives example
Woman told she’s a shoddy thinker for providing acedotal example

Do you accept their ‘almost’ or not? Nobody is saying same job differential pay is the number one driver of men being paid more than women. They’re saying it happens and they’ve seen it. You are denying that.

You remind me of one specific other poster on here - same style.

"You asked if anyone had seen this happen."

That was someone else

Indeed sorry mate Bowlofbabelfish is exhibiting the more rational and reasoned position here. Go back and re-read your exchanges you might learn something.

When all job differences are accounted for, the pay gap almost disappears. This was based on data for 8.7m employees worldwide, gathered by the international Head-Hunters Korn Ferry.

Firstly, Korn Ferry own the Hay Group, a company that runs salary surveys. The data they have put out in the brochures and press releases the Economist quoted is from the Hay Group salary surveys, which is within the brand Korn Ferry. I know this because I work with Hay Group on salary surveys and equal pay and gender pay gap projects.

Head hunter data for pay is really classed as more anecdotal by pay experts than properly set up surveys we use. We don't use head hunter data much.

And as I explained last night splitting the data by function is a job specialism difference but is not an automatic equal pay defence.

Secondly, last night fmsfms had no idea what I was getting at (I quote) but is now repeating what I said as a self reporting expert with a level of certainty that really is not warranted.

Which is quite amusing (not).

Honestly, I recommend ignoring as the best approach.

And as a final word (or many) to fmsfms from me on this subject.

Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy Logical fallacy
Logical fallacy Logical fallacy
Logical fallacy

Correctly determining pay for "talent" is supposedly more nebulous than for jobs, but it is mostly based on agent negotiations and pushover buyers. Now it's having the spotlight shone on it, the excuses are crumbling.

But no-one here is talking about "talent".

"Now it's having the spotlight shone on it, the excuses are crumbling.

But no-one here is talking about "talent".

So why can't nobody answer the below questions? Funny that nobody has even attempted

Did Munroe Bergdorf get paid the same as Cheryl for their loreal campaign?

Can Munroe charge/ask more for her time now she has a bigger profile

Is it fair that the Victoria's Secret Angels get paid more for their annual show than the non angels?

If Jane sells 10 TVs a week at Currys, is never late and Bob only sells 5 TVs and is hungover every Sunday then is Jane entitled to ask for a raise at the end of the year?

What about if Bob sorts his performance out and does just as well as Jane, then Jane gets an offer of a 20% pay rise to go work for a competitor. Are Currys entitled to match that offer and put Jane further ahead if Bob for doing the same job?

Kate Moss said she didn't get out of bed for less than £10k. Could those companies that hired her of got someone for cheaper/less to do the same job? But they wanted Kate Moss - why?

Just chipping in to say that within the last five years (being deliberately vague due to non disclosure agreement) I and a group of colleagues (many tens, again being vague) had to take our then employer to court for equal pay - we won and the correction in pay was in excess of ten percent. It's the second big equal pay case my union had taken on in the last decade and won.

Back when I was in the university sector, the government's own pay audit found a systematic pay gap at every level - ie women lecturer A paid less than men lecturer A, women lecturer B paid less than men lecturer B and so on through senior lecturer, reader and up to professor. (So not just that the number of male professors was higher, though that of course was true.)

For something that supposedly never happens, it seems to happen a hell of a lot.

"Honestly, I recommend ignoring as the best approach."

And yet you revived the thread after it had laid dormant all day

"Head hunter data for pay is really classed as more anecdotal by pay experts than properly set up surveys we use"

So "analysed over 8 million workers in 33 different countries" is anecdotal now?

Head-hunters have target salary ranges/budgets from their clients and have to ensure their candidate salary expectations fit. I assume they're getting first hand salary information directly from their candidates which presumably is then verified before an offer is sent out.

By all means do explain why their 8m strong study is "anecdotal" because right now: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" - Christopher Hitchins

When actually the only evidence posted so far for women being paid less than men for the same jobs is anecdotal.

So why can't nobody answer the below questions?

Aside from the double negative they’re irrelevant ... and you still haven’t answered mine. If by objective, company agreed metrics, a man is performing worse than a woman what’s the justification for the man being paid more?

As many people have told you, sex pay discrepancy exists. It has multiple complex causes. Some are societal and structural. At the same time there are jobs out there where men are paid more than women. In some of those cases the objective, company agreed metrics for performance show a man doing less well than a woman and still being paid more.

This is not the main driver of the sex pay gap - you’d need a small monograph to explore all the reasons. But it exists. It’s one cause among many.

@transexclusionaryMRA "I don’t think the answer that on average male athletes and actor/ presenters are bigger draws actually stands up as that in and of itself reveals a culture wide bias against women and female achievements."

Disagree almost entirely with that statement. And I really don't see how anyone can argue with the amount mens club football teams play their players or claim that womens club football teams are as lucrative.

Womens tennis is maybe the only sport which rivals the mens game for audience figures/income.

As for TV presenters, the BBC pay gap drama was a load of nonsense and just a list of mens/womens names with salaries next to them, there was no extra detail eg hours on air, number of shows worked, channels/stations appeared on etc

I don't even have to think about it to instantly recall the most nonsensical complaints

The presenter of Womens hour complaining she didn't get paid as much as some male radio presenters. You present a show called "womens hour" - the target audience is presumably 50% of the listening audience which presumably impacts audience figures, and you present that show for an hour a day, 5 days a week.

Chris Evans being the highest paid BBC person. He literally resurrected Top Gear, the BBC franchise that the BBC sell worldwide, that they sell DVDs of and other merchandise. On top of that he presents a prime time radio show and has a 25+ year career of being on top of the ratings, both on TV and radio.

Compare that with Claudia Winkleman who I believe was the highest paid female presenter. She presents Dancing with the Stars - guess what? The BBC can't sell that abroad because the USA has their own version with their own c-list celebs, nobody in America wants to see our c-listers prance around LOL.

Carrie Grace - already dealt with this one.

FM's - do you think it would help you to read an elementary logic text book? You have asserted that it is never the case that men are paid more than women for the same job. In the context of a statement asserting something never happens, one counter instance (and many have been supplied on this thread) is sufficient to refute the hypothesis.

Wittering on about "anecdata" just shows you have a very poor grasp of logic. Frankly, you come across as a bit dim.

"Aside from the double negative they’re irrelevant "

How are they irrelevant, someone - maybe you but can't be bothered to scroll back and check brought up the BBC pay claims.

Examples of how profile/celebrity status influence pay and rightly elevate pay above others is a direct rebuttal to the BBC claims.

I'm also pretty sure I asked my questions first, so if you want to get technical about it

"As many people have told you, sex pay discrepancy exists."

I'm starting to think people can't keep up.

I've never denied the pay gap exists = that women on average earn less than men (where we disagree is the causes)

I'm denying, based on the Korn Ferry evidence, that on average when comparing like for like/equivalent jobs, the pay gap "almost disappears"

If you want to believe that women as a whole get paid less than men for the same jobs that's fine. If you find random posters anecdotes compelling evidence over the 8m workers Korn Ferry study, again fine. But I don't have to go with the anecdotes over the data, not in the absence of any "actual" evidence that could convince me otherwise.

Can anyone find a study that says women get paid less for the same jobs?