Male colleagues paid more

[miffed1]

We do exactly the same job, in fact, I have been doing it for over a year and am training these new male recruits to do my job.

I saw the job advert for the role and it was being advertised at 65% more than I am on. Once the new recruits had started, I asked if my pay had been considered for review and have since been told there is a "pay freeze". I have explained that I am not simply asking for a pay review, but to be paid the same as my male colleagues who do the same job.

Does anyone know what my rights are in this situation? Thanks in advance!

Have you only recruited men? That's weird to start with.

@Lighttunnelahead

Have you only recruited men? That's weird to start with.

Only if they were recruited because they were men, and not because they happened to be the best applicants.

Yes OP - quote sex discrimination at them. If you are training these new people, then your employer is absolutely taking the piss.

That is a massive difference.

Keep pursuing it. There are lots of letter templates for pay inequality and sex discrimination online so take it to HR.

@Lighttunnelahead

Have you only recruited men? That's weird to start with.

It is by chance that the new recruits are men really. It is the type of job where there are generally more men.

Thank you MustardRose; that is exactly what I thought - but wanted to make sure I am not missing something before I go down the road of "making a fuss" - not that a man would ever worry about that! 🙄

@Librariesmakeshhhhappen

That is a massive difference.

Keep pursuing it. There are lots of letter templates for pay inequality and sex discrimination online so take it to HR.

I will do - and thanks for the tip re templates. I had wondered about going to HR, I wasn't sure as they must have discussed the "pay freeze" line with them before coming back to me - but maybe not!

If you are doing exactly the same role, they are breaking the law by paying a man more. You have an equal pay claim. If you are in a union talk to them, if not look at your house insurance. There may be cover that allows you consult a solicitor.

Good luck

Just noticed your employer has an HR department. Talk to them. No way will they defend the pay freeze argument if you start to talk about an equal pay claim.

It is perfectly acceptable to recruit new people and pay them a lot more than what already existing employees are paid. It can be down to supply and demand. If at the time you were employed, it was easy to recruit, that would be an incentive to do so at a lower salary than now if indeed they can't get any candidates at your income level.

What would be discriminatory is if you'd been employed at the same time and the men were paid twice.

@vivainsomnia

It is perfectly acceptable to recruit new people and pay them a lot more than what already existing employees are paid. It can be down to supply and demand. If at the time you were employed, it was easy to recruit, that would be an incentive to do so at a lower salary than now if indeed they can't get any candidates at your income level.

What would be discriminatory is if you'd been employed at the same time and the men were paid twice.

Hmm, that is a good point and maybe does cloud the issue. I was recruited to do a lesser role, I took on extra responsibilities over the course of the year which culminated in my job title changing at the same time as the new recruits started. So prior to them starting, there was no one in the business with that title, then as of April, there were 3 of us. Me with over a years experience in the role and 2 newcomers.

Perhaps I should have applied for the role when it was advertised! I honestly didn't think my employer would ever be the type to not pay fairly.

It may not have been deliberate but there is no way this situation can continue. If HR do not sort it out immediately then an equal pay claim should get things moving!

If you've already approached the issue and they are refusing to pay more then I'd brush up your cv and look to move. Would you be willing to do that?

People keep suggesting equal pay claim - via tribunal I assume... how does your relationship with your employer recover after this - surely you'll need to move jobs anyway?
Well done on expanding your role OP - sometimes it takes a chat outlining your extended responsibilities and how they compare to the new recruits for managers to recognise your growth. Gather the evidence, speak enthusiastically about the opportunities you've grabbed and enjoyed and how you'd like more. You sound like an asset they'd be sorry to loose.

Do they have less skills and relevant experience than you or more?
Are you still being expected to train them up?
If less and you are still training them I would make it clear to your manager that you won't continue as are uncomfortable training people of same grade but significantly higher pay. That although you love working for the company you feel you are not being treated equally and this is unsettling you greatly.
I'd copy HR..

Realistically you may have to move employers. It is often the way to progress money wise.. Many companies have rules like max pay rise limits for internal recruitment which means they can be on lower pay than new recruits and end up leaving.. Far more effective to keep their good staff

@ZenNudist

If you've already approached the issue and they are refusing to pay more then I'd brush up your cv and look to move. Would you be willing to do that?

I absolutely would. This is the hill I am prepared to die on, I feel quite demoralised really. The cheek of being asked to train 2 guys so that they earn a nice hefty salary, which has increased my workload in itself. It was 8 weeks ago that I first raised it, it is an insult that they didn't rectify it ASAP in the first place.

I am annoyed at myself for not insisting that I be "Senior" and ask for more than the 2 new recruits right at the start.

@vivainsomnia

It is perfectly acceptable to recruit new people and pay them a lot more than what already existing employees are paid. It can be down to supply and demand. If at the time you were employed, it was easy to recruit, that would be an incentive to do so at a lower salary than now if indeed they can't get any candidates at your income level.

What would be discriminatory is if you'd been employed at the same time and the men were paid twice.

Can you apply for an external role first before coming to them? This would strengthen your position from your immediate managers perspective.

@happytoday73

Do they have less skills and relevant experience than you or more? Are you still being expected to train them up? If less and you are still training them I would make it clear to your manager that you won't continue as are uncomfortable training people of same grade but significantly higher pay. That although you love working for the company you feel you are not being treated equally and this is unsettling you greatly. I'd copy HR..

Realistically you may have to move employers. It is often the way to progress money wise.. Many companies have rules like max pay rise limits for internal recruitment which means they can be on lower pay than new recruits and end up leaving.. Far more effective to keep their good staff

Would not say any of that stuff if you are planning to leave - work hard on the way out and tell your story to your new employer as one of enthusiasm and accelerated learning that went unrewarded - leave your previous reference in tact and your head held high - if anyone speaks to HR about you it's all good.

Thank you for the advice everyone. I am going to have a word with HR, see what the lay of the land is and take it from there.

I will let you know how I get on!

An equal pay claim can be awarded retrospectively too - for 6 or 7 years I think. Don't ask for a pay rise - say you are entitled to a pay rise as you are senior to 2 male colleagues and they are paid 65% more. Tell them you will require your pay to at the very least be in excess of their pay. As for a freeze - bullshit! If pay was frozen they wouldn't have been offering an enormous increase that to new recruits.
Make sure you mean business. State your case in a calm, objective, email to HR telling them you've consulted ACAS / your union. And bcc it to your home email.

Speak to ACAS.

Your relationship with your employer is already not great if they won’t pay you the amount they are paying a man. I do agree with looking at other employers.
Equal pay is very specific legally. You do have a case. The only way that the job market and paying new recruits more would be relevant to this is if they tried (usually more than once) to recruit and couldn’t. Then, and only then, they could advertise with the job with the salary you get, plus a market supplement. They have to be able to prove they have tried to recruit at your salary and failed.
Good luck

It is by chance that the new recruits are men really. It is the type of job where there are generally more men
So they didn't decide to pay them more because they are men since the salary was known at the time of the recruitment and you even say that they didn't pick them just because they were men. You didn't lose out on the job to them.

There is no discrimination based on gender. Your issue is that they decided to pay more the new recruit. That's unfair but not covered under the protected characteristics, so I think you'd struggle at a tribunal.

@vivainsomnia

It is perfectly acceptable to recruit new people and pay them a lot more than what already existing employees are paid. It can be down to supply and demand. If at the time you were employed, it was easy to recruit, that would be an incentive to do so at a lower salary than now if indeed they can't get any candidates at your income level.

What would be discriminatory is if you'd been employed at the same time and the men were paid twice.

Theoretically, this might be true, but I think it's a bit more of a grey area especially with such massive pay differentials. for example, if it's a large business, pay is likely in bands. In which case, if you'r paid at the bottom of the band due to historical reasons and they're paid at the top of the band because that was what was necessary to recruit, you'd have a difficult case for discrimination. However, a 65% differential makes me think this is not a pay bad issue and that you are still being paid as per your original job.

Incidentally, this was a HUGE issue for me at my last full time role. They did pay me out a LOT when I left (far more than me or my lawyer expected) and I have come to suspect that this is the main reason - there were multiple men being paid significantly MORE than me even though the were at a lower level. Unfortunately, at the time, while I was aware of that issue, the issue of pay discrimination was less obvious and I didn't raise it.

Good luck OP this is rubbish