One up for equality???

[Purple]

There's no need for me to add anything to that.

 

[jem]

I have to say RD that you have made extremly good posts on this subject.
Rainyday etc what you seem to have forgotten is teh fact that there is only 1 reason for anyone to go into business that is to make money, its not to employ people, its not to be fair to community,(although both may be by products), its to make money.
Most small business are keeping going, there is a major difference between small business, working from day to day and large business/companies large ones can afford to have people cross trained, small business have people trained to cover for short periods of time holidays etc only not for 3/4 months, doesn't work that way.
The bottom line is with the exception of holidays, no work no pay very simple, no one pays the self employed for being out.

 

[RainyDay]

I get the feeling I'm being attacked for things I haven't said. I didn't make any comments about whether businesses should pay maternity pay. I didn't suggest that an employee being out on maternity doesn't leave a business down one person. I didn't suggest make any comments at legislation in this area. Let me just sumarise & restate my key points on this thread.

I'm extremely sceptical about the existence of any firm data/research to show that men are more productive than women, with the exception of physical labour role.

Any additional unavoidable costs associated with maternity leave (over and above additional costs that exist to ensure holiday cover, sick cover, parental leave cover) are marginal, and extremely unlikely to be significant in comparing male/female productivity.

 

[daltonr]

I get the feeling I'm being attacked for things I haven't said.

I get that a lot too.

I didn't make any comments about whether businesses should pay maternity pay.

I agree, we were talking about the indirect costs.

I didn't suggest that an employee being out on maternity doesn't leave a business down one person.

You did suggest that the impact of being down one person should be minimal because the "smart" companies should be cross training. We're just setting you straight on the naivete of that with regard to many small busineses, particularly in the knowledge based jobs which is the way work is moving.

I didn't suggest make any comments at legislation in this area.

Yes you did...

You tell him quite quickly that it doesn't matter how you know, what matters is that he is breaking the law - and his options are to fix the problem himself by negotiation, or to face an expensive legal process and a pile of negative publicity.

This was the comment that sparked this whole discussion. You omitted his/her third option which is to tell the employee that he/she values the other employee more.

I'm extremely sceptical about the existence of any firm data/research to show that men are more productive than women, with the exception of physical labour role.

OK. I think you're right. Two Employees of equal ability who devote equal effort to their jobs are certainly likely to be equally valuable to a company (productive if you like). I'dagree that gender is unlikely to affect their ability or productivity.

Any additional unavoidable costs associated with maternity leave (over and above additional costs that exist to ensure holiday cover, sick cover, parental leave cover) are marginal

I disagree with you on that. But at least we all know where we stand now.

-Rd

 

[RainyDay]

You did suggest that the impact of being down one person should be minimal because the "smart" companies should be cross training. We're just setting you straight on the naivete of that with regard to many small busineses, particularly in the knowledge based jobs which is the way work is moving.

You don't hold a monopoly on knowledge of how small companies operate. It seems that my experiences are different to yours. And just for the record, your assumption that large companies have loads of excess resources that can easily be cross-trained and swapped around doesn't hold water as a general principle either.

Yes you did... This was the comment that sparked this whole discussion. You omitted his/her third option which is to tell the employee that he/she values the other employee more.

This isn't a 'comment' on the legislation. It's a statement of fact. It is against the law to pay men more than women for equivalent work.

Your third option is an over-simplification. If you checked out the links to the Equality Tribunal cases, you'll see that those guys will crawl all over such claims with a fine toothcomb - if the claim doesn't stand up, the employer will end up paying out.

On the more general issue, I'm seeing a growing acceptance of seeing the guys taking their full parental leave (up to & including director-level staff) and the guys rushing out at 5 pm to do the creche run.

 

[daltonr]

You don't hold a monopoly on knowledge of how small companies operate.

I don't think I ever claimed to have. I just offered my observations of the 4 or 5 small companies I had seen up close, and my observation of having been involved in running 2 small companies.

And just for the record, your assumption that large companies have loads of excess resources that can easily be cross-trained and swapped around doesn't hold water as a general principle either.

And I made this assumption where exactly?

I did confine myself as much as possible to speaking about small knowledge based companies, because it's what I know best. I don't think I passed ANY comments on big businesses. Although I think it's pretty obvious that the owner of a small business is more likely to be hit in the pocket by someone taking leave than the HR Dept of a big business. Money has a way of focussing the mind.

Your third option is an over-simplification. If you checked out the links to the Equality Tribunal cases, you'll see that those guys will crawl all over such claims with a fine toothcomb - if the claim doesn't stand up, the employer will end up paying out.

It's no more of a simplification than your advice to inform the boss that he/she's breaking the law.

My income has yoyo'd up and down over the years. I've taken pay cuts to work on interesting projects with smaller companies, and I've been over paid in some instances too. I don't look at others and complain that they earn more than me. I have no right to complain.

In a low skill job where workers can be swapped with very little trianing then yes, any pay gap is questionable and should be easily addressed. Most of these jobs are unionised anyway so I'd have to ask what the hell the Unions are being paid for if they can't even ensure equality in peoples pay.

In the more skilled and knowledge based jobs people have far more capacity to market themselves and if they do it properly they may earn more than their collegues. These jobs tend to be less unionised for the simple reason that most people in the industry feel they can look after themselves.

Interesting that this comes down to 2 men arguing. Is there any woman out there earning less than a colleque. Who would be willing to join the discussion. Can you say honestly that the difference in pay is down to gender and not knowledge and how you market yourself. Can you say honestly that you couldn't earn a lot more by switching jobs?

It would also be interesting to hear from Men who feel they are underpaid. Because I guarentee you they are out there.


-Rd

 

[Purple]

Off topic a bit I know but the idea that there are knowledge based jobs and then there are manual jobs is a gross oversimplification. For example the key guys on the factory floor in my company (engineering) are manual workers but the skills required for those jobs take 10-15 years to learn. The machines are programmed from PC's in a CAD office by the same people who run the cells and set up the machines. It is a small specialised industry and there is no chance of getting anyone to fill in from an agency if one of them is out. The cost would be very high even if it were possible as yearly pay for the permanent staff often exceeds 100K.
We advertise as an equal opportunities company but have no female employees on the factory floor or in any technical engineering post. The reason for that is that none, not one, has ever applied for a job.

 

[daltonr]

> For example the key guys on the factory floor in my company (engineering) are manual > workers but the skills required for those jobs take 10-15 years to learn.

Then it's a knowledge based job. I didn't say that all manual jobs are plug and play. If your job relies on knowledge or skill then your pay packed should reflect that. If there are different levels of knowledge and skill then that may be reflected in different pay packets.

-Rd