HMRC gender pay gap more than doubles

[Risslan]

From 2.8% to 6.6% for mean and 8.8% to 12.6% for median.

Only just seen this, I don't know how 'gender' is defined but presumably if it was self selected that'd improve the pay gap anyway.

They are putting it down to more women being in low paid roles and more men being in high paid roles. No shit!

Does anyone follow this sort of thing? Wondering if it's representative of the UK or rest of CS.

Is this the report of HMRCs own internal pay gap as an organisation, or another HMRC report on the workforce as a whole?

Their analysis shows that they have increased the number of part time administrative roles for women in the regional offices versus more men in the full time jobs in London which pay more because it's London.

Is this a bad thing? I don't think so.

Surely it then highlights structural inequality in that women are going for lower paid roles - why? And men are able to get higher paid positions in an expensive city - again, why? What are they doing to flatten that difference instead of increase it? Is it the hours worked? The skills and experience required? The recruitment process?

Lots of useful data points and nice charts here: www.civilserviceworld.com/in-depth/article/revealed-the-civil-service-departments-with-the-biggest-gender-pay-gaps-2022

At my department, the mean gap has almost halved since last year, but the median gap has jumped up. (Last year the 'middle man' and 'middle woman' were both at the same grade, now the middle woman is a grade below.) I'm not drawing any firm conclusions based on a single year's data for a relatively small department though.

Surely it then highlights structural inequality in that women are going for lower paid roles - why?

Maybe it's because women want part time jobs and are able to get a quality administrative role at HMRC because they have listened to what women want.

Men at the same pay level are more likely to be working in skilled trades than women are, any don't want part time administrative jobs in the same numbers as women.

And men are able to get higher paid positions in an expensive city - again, why? What are they doing to flatten that difference instead of increase it? Is it the hours worked? The skills and experience required? The recruitment process?

Women have access to these jobs too. Over time women have increased representation in these higher paid management roles, it's apparent from ONS data that this is the long term trend.

There are usually a substantial number of people on the exact same salary on structured pay spines. Sometimes it just takes adding or subtracting a few people in a grade to move the middle person over a grade boundary. It's not indicate of lots of women being paid less.

Do women want part time jobs? Or have to take part time jobs because they are the default carers in their families?

How many men compared with women work part time because they have caring responsibilities?

When the government introduced the legal right to request part time working in 2003 for parents it was because it was asked for by parents. It was extended to all staff in 2014.

Why do they need to hire women for regional administrative roles and men for well paid roles in London? Why can't they also do the other way around?

You can only hire the people that apply for the jobs.

The split between men and women on the London pay range is 50.1% and 49.9%

That sounds pretty equal?

The over whelming factor behind office based jobs having a so called gender pay gap is the fact that women don't do skilled trades and prefer to work in office jobs so the quartiles are always going to be skewed to women. The men are simply elsewhere being paid similar rates.

If they have followed the regulations:

• it is sex based pay gap using sex I.e. male and female. However, this may include employees with a GRC in their legal sex. Given that in total there are c5000 people with a GRC, the numbers in HMRC will be so small and unlikely to impact the figures.
• The calculations use hourly rate so full time or part time is irrelevant.
• This is structural because proportionately more men fill the top jobs.

Is that what structural means?

@Scyla I think I’ve used structural correctly.

You have a hierarchical structure, at each level in the structure people are paid within a range so mitigating the risk of equal pay claims. Those at the top are paid multiples of those at the bottom of the structure. So one SCS 2 can impact average hourly pay far more than one AO.

Policies and procedures such as recruitment and promotion determine the level you join the structure and how you move up the structure. They are compliant with Equality Act and D & I best practice, so women and employers with PC are recruited and promoted.

The problem is that historically the top of the structure was overwhelmingly white males and it takes decades to over come that as you can’t just sack them. Which is what makes it structural.

Men in skilled trades earn massively more than admin roles in the civil service! You can't possibly think those things are at the same pay level?

www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/bulletins/genderpaygapintheuk/2022#:~:text=Among%20full%2Dtime%20employees%20the,at%20the%20longer%2Dterm%20trend.

ONS data

The figures for skilled trades and for administration governmental are both £13 plus change per hour.

Skilled trades is usually used to mean plumbers/electricians etc - there is no way they are only making £13 an hour. I live up north and I know they make much more than that up here.

It would be interesting to see the pay gaps within each grade - ie are a lot more male EOs better paid that female etc etc

@londonmummy1966 That is an Equal Pay audit not a gender pay gap report. The two use different methodologies for comparing pay and have different purposes.

It is highly likely an equal pay report will find no issues but an organisation can still have a significant gender pay gap.

@Scyla ypu may find this website gender-pay-gap.service.gov.uk interesting as it’s where all Gender Pay Gap reports are published. You can search by employer.

The problem is that historically the top of the structure was overwhelmingly white males and it takes decades to over come that as you can’t just sack them. Which is what makes it structural.

The structure is the hierarchy itself, not the workforce.

Female representation in senior management is increasing and it's this change that's reducing the country wide gap. There is no gap for women below 40 and hasn't been for a while. It's closing for women in their 50s but for women in their 60s it's not and probably won't as we experienced more discrimination in our early careers than women do now.

So the senior management workforce is changing, the employment structure has become more flexible and the equal cohort of women under 40 will with close the gap in their 50s, and are working part time as was their request 20 years ago. It's interesting that the 20 year structure of part time on request coincides with the 20 or so years of women under 40 in work that have no gender pay gap in the UK.

Thanks for the link to the government website! I've used it a few times now to load reports!

(and wtf has white got to do with it!)

@Scyla The structure is also how you progress up the hierarchy and that has been a barrier to make quick changes.

All you have said is correct. Most equality legislation started in the 70s or later. It took publicised cases to make employers take it seriously. As you point out it is only in the last 20 years the right to flexible working has had an impact so those in their 30s and 40s should see a difference.

One analysis I did showed those who work past 60 can be stereotyped as low paid women and high paid men. The first can’t afford to retire the second don’t want to.

WRT white males, two reasons for using that term:

1. For the last few years there has been a significant discussions about requiring organisations to publish their Ethnicity Pay Gap. I expect the outcomes to be worse than the gender pay gap figures. Again the fact that senior roles were historically white male will be a factor in why there is a pay gap.
2. I probably could have written White, able bodied, older married males. People with Protected Characteristics (PC) have historically been treated less favourable, hence the need for the legislation. If you did a pay gap for each PC you would find for most PCs there is an impact on the pay gap.

Again the fact that senior roles were historically white male will be a factor in why there is a pay gap.

What you mean we didn't have medieval black kings? We were "structurally" racist no doubt.

Scyla
What you mean we didn't have medieval black kings? We were "structurally" racist no doubt.

Well that escalated quickly!