Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Where does it end (Workplace Discrimination)?

  • 21-12-2022 8:35pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭


    Just seeing this and am left thinking - WT actual F?

    For those not wanting to read...

    • Women are paid 6% more per hour (on average) than men.
    • Women mainly employed in Upper/Upper-middle Management roles

    yet, all they can talk about is how they want to improve things for only their female employees...

    The company has a number of initiatives in place including the creation by its talent management team of several female-targeted internal talent programmes with a focus on career development.


    Iarnród Éireann chief executive Jim Meade said the act has given the company the opportunity to analyse its commitment to its female employee base and “identify areas for improvement.” 

    So, their response to "your company discriminates in favour of women" is to "we must do more to increase this discrimination"???

    Now, this is not a woman-bashing thread. Substitute the above for anything - age/nationality/religion/race or simply reverse the genders etc. My complete lack of faith in the future of the human race is with the logic of it all. It started with "equal opportunities", which I think everybody is OK with. But then it got distorted to "discriminatory opportunities" and "equality of outcome" which most people (outside of feminists/woke etc) are not OK with. Now, certain people are looking for "discriminatory outcome" as well? So where will it end?

    It was a serious facepalm time when this Act was introduced, and now it seems that yes, the identity-politics people, regardless of the findings, will still throw all logic out the window and try to fcuk things up even more.



«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Allinall


    Why did you say “their response “, and not “his response “, when you quoted the chief executive, who is a man?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭dotsman


    "Their" as in the plural. The CEO is speaking for the organisation. We typically use the plural possessive pronouns when talking about an organisation (occasionally we also use "it").

    Are you honestly saying, having read all the above, that the use of pronouns are the first thing that comes to mind?



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,085 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    I don't know any guy, working in the FDI sector that isn't being discriminated in the workplace. It is systematic.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Allinall


    Are you honestly saying that the HR policy of a semi-state company on the periphery of Europe has caused your complete lack of faith in the human race?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭dotsman


    Nope. This is merely another in a long list of increasingly stupid decisions that are being deemed as acceptable that is leading me to lose faith.

    But again, you seem to be attacking me personally rather than responding to the actual topic. Do you have an opinion on this topic? Does anything about it strike you as illogical and/or just plain wrong? Are you concerned at all that the situation is getting increasingly out of hand? Or do you agree with the organisations position?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭nothing


    Did you miss the bit where only 10% of the workforce is female?



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,722 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    I'm sure that's where IE are coming from, but my god, 10% of the workforce having a slightly higher average rate per hour compared to the remaining 90% of the employees, they must be on some serious money! I'm sure IE's plan is to higher a lot more women in the Lower Middle and Lower quartiles.

    Suppose next year they'll have to include the other categories too. That'll skew the figures.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,085 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    It never ends. There are a multitude of NGO's pushing harder and harder for more discrimination in fields where typically males are drawn to, you'll notice in area's where women are drawn to, like teaching, administration, there are no gender quotas.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,602 ✭✭✭buried


    Why aren't some of these NGO's pushing for greater number of Traveller cultured folk to join the Police Force/Guards in that particular workplace where their involvement could actually benefit our entire society?

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,085 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    Benefit our society?

    The purpose of an NGO is not to benefit our society. (we spend €6 billion a year on NGOs)

    The companies that impose gender quotas do not benefit from quotas. Unfortunately, it's down the line before that problem escalates, and if you are not a government funded body, you'll be in trouble.

    But none of this is of benefit to society. The Government funds the NGO, the NGO lobbies the Government that funds it. Taxpayers money gets wasted.

    I'm sure there is a word that describes Government/Corporate bodies imposing rules/quotas, but I can't seem to think what it is!!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭dotsman


    Nope. As you can imagine, the bulk of the jobs in IE are manual/dirty/require technical skills/low-pay. It appears that very few women are applying for those positions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭nothing


    So what you're saying is that the gap in average pay is skewed as its not comparing like with like? Grand.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭dotsman


    Welcome to the Gender Pay Gap Myth and the corresponding Gender Pay Gap Information Act 2021.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,121 ✭✭✭screamer


    Pay gap is no myth, I’ve worked payroll for years for all sizes of companies across the world and I can tell you that very few pay women on par or more than men for the same role. IE are an exception. Anyways, sure off you go and get huffy about a handful of women paid a bit more than men in one company on one years report, don’t worry about the millions of women underpaid compared to their male colleagues in thousands of companies for many many years.



  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 9,819 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007


    Nobody gets paid the “average wage” so it’s a rather pointless measure. It tells you absolutely nothing about whether like jobs are paid the same or not. You do know how to calculate these things right?



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,340 ✭✭✭francois




  • Registered Users Posts: 2,667 ✭✭✭donaghs


    You seem determined by any means necessary to “derail” (sorry) this thread by petty insults, can you please address the topic?

    the OP raises a very good point.

    plus, when you look at longer term trends like males falling behind in school and college results, they’re going to need jobs that like this that men seem to want to do. Rather than have an increasing pool of young men who don’t have the skill and qualifications to compete for their quota of white collar jobs. And now having to compete for a quota of lower paid jobs in area like Irish rail?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,601 ✭✭✭The J Stands for Jay


    The statistics show that women in Ireland earn more than men up to the age of 30.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,121 ✭✭✭screamer


    So then working from let’s say 22 to 30 is 8 years of overpay for women…. And 30 to 65 is 35 years of par or underpay. Yep, easy to see there’s no pay gap then…… I despair.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Oh NOW the gender pay gap is a problem because how dare women earn more than men for doing the same work.

    Whereas when the opposite is said its dismissed as a ‘myth’.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 409 ✭✭Guess_Who


    Its almost as if a lot of women at around the age of 30 make life choices that impact their ability to work. I wonder what that might be.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,085 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    No, there will always be a pay gap.

    It is a consequence of a multitude of reasons, from work/life balance to skills, to aptitude.

    The reasons for the pay gap is something even a young person can understand quiet quickly. The only way to eliminate it entirely is through a planned economy. It's ok to advocate for a planned economy, but lets not pretend it is because of so called "gender inequality".



  • Registered Users Posts: 409 ✭✭Guess_Who


    I think thats not really the gist of what is being said.

    I think you know that too.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Perhaps not, but the OP is misrepresenting what is being said.

    The fact that there are dozens of companies that released their GPG details all showing huge disparities between men and women and the OP decides the one outlier is the problem because they want to have better female representation in all facets of the workplace, not just in senior roles.

    What is so abhorrently wrong with that?



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,667 ✭✭✭donaghs


    No, but you probably know this already. You’re just trying to deflect and get reactions.

    It shows that the thinking behind so many of these gender initiatives are a foregone conclusion. They are looking to show unfairness to women, and advantages for men. The data is a tool for this. And when the actual data shows is more nuanced, or contradicts the supposition, you can just ignore it and carry on with the program.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,490 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    As far as I can see, the OP's interpretation is wrong, at least in that there's no evidence here that women are being paid more than men for the same job.

    Women are paid more on average, but that's because they are more likely to hold higher level positions relative to their overall number.

    The stat doesn't really mean anything other than higher level positions get paid better than lower level positions.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,085 ✭✭✭Silentcorner


    Wait a minute...are you suggesting a vested interest is manipulating statistics to make it look like gender inequality?



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Very true

    But employers across Ireland are now having to incur costs to tell the government that people in higher positions get paid more because its opression of women, even though "woman" is now just a concept.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,634 ✭✭✭dotsman


    Nope, my interpretation is correct.


    In fact, that is why I agree with the rest of your post. You are articulating the Gender Pay Gap Myth perfectly.


    My problem with all this is that, while we know the Gender Pay Gap is all BS where apples are being compared to oranges, we still have to play along and pretend that it is true. And even when, in this case, the results show women are higher paid under the "Gender Pay Gap measurement methodology", the response is that:

    The company has a number of initiatives in place including the creation by its talent management team of several female-targeted internal talent programmes with a focus on career development.


    Iarnród Éireann chief executive Jim Meade said the act has given the company the opportunity to analyse its commitment to its female employee base and “identify areas for improvement.” 

    And so, my question is (in both the OP and the thread title) - where does this all end?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,200 ✭✭✭BrianD3


    Women are wonderful, women are oppressed. When women do better than men in any aspect of life, they "outperform" them (i.e. women are wonderful) but when men do better, it's because of discrimination (i.e. women are oppressed)

    For several years now, we have regularly been hearing about various "initiatives" to improve employment prospects for women and stamp out discrimination. When it is pointed out that "positive" discrimination is still discrimination, the claim is that there will be no discrimination against men, that it is just about "encouraging" women. Load of rubbish, kudos is gained by employing and promoting women meaning men are now routinely discriminated against.

    I'm no longer employed as I have become an informal carer. If I do ever try to get back to employment, I'll likely experience discrimination on the basis of both my age and gender. A lot of carers' careers suffer and the majority of carers seem to be women - if society wants to address this, the solution should be to support carers, not support people based on the equipment between their legs.



Advertisement