nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Discrimination in Pay

jt69er

Hi, just wondering if anyone has experienced Discrimination in Pay for the same work in their job. If so,and a complaint was made, was it resolved to the claimants satisfaction?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

OMM 0000

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Why?

If you're a generalist manager with a team who have specific, in-demand skills, then they team members are likely worth more than you are.

I agree.

There's a myth out there that manager means you're the "best" person on the team, or the most skilled, or the most knowledgable, or the most important.

I recently hired a senior data scientist who is paid a lot more than me. My option was pay him what he's demanding, or spend another few months trying to find someone with his skillset. At no point was my ego bruised - the fact of the matter is he is currently more valuable than me. Good for him.

WAW

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Why?

If you're a generalist manager with a team who have specific, in-demand skills, then they team members are likely worth more than you are.

In Civil Service? Generic clerical staff should be earning more than their manager?

Mrs OBumble

WAW wrote: »

A manager should be earning more than the staff they manage.

Why?

If you're a generalist manager with a team who have specific, in-demand skills, then they team members are likely worth more than you are.

WAW

Littlefinger wrote: »

Yes but after an increment or two the EO will be higher.. the end payscale of an EO is higher than a CO.

A manager should be earning more than the staff they manage.

You would have to be at point 6 or 7 of the EO scale to equal the top of the CO scale ( Inc long service increments).

[Deleted User]

WAW wrote: »

Well you can be working in the civil service at a higher grade than the people you are managing but earning less than them, not necessarily because they have more work experience than you but because CS/PS only recognise experience solely in the CS / PS for the purposes of pay increments. They recruit EOs externally with management experience to come in and manage COs who are earning more than them. The mind boggles as to how this is allowed. Likewise you can have two colleagues doing the same job at the same grade, one of them with a qualification and same number of years' experience but the other earns more because their experience is in the public sector and came up through the ranks and the other one got their experience in private sector and then moved into public sector. Protectionism of the highest order. How is this allowed?

Yes but after an increment or two the EO will be higher.. the end payscale of an EO is higher than a CO.

WAW

Well you can be working in the civil service at a higher grade than the people you are managing but earning less than them, not necessarily because they have more work experience than you but because CS/PS only recognise experience solely in the CS / PS for the purposes of pay increments. They recruit EOs externally with management experience to come in and manage COs who are earning more than them. The mind boggles as to how this is allowed. Likewise you can have two colleagues doing the same job at the same grade, one of them with a qualification and same number of years' experience but the other earns more because their experience is in the public sector and came up through the ranks and the other one got their experience in private sector and then moved into public sector. Protectionism of the highest order. How is this allowed?

OMM 0000

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Which of the nine grounds do you believe is leading to the discrimination?

If it's something else (prettier, fitter, more experience, the person is the manager's cousin). then it's allowed anywhere but in the civil service.

And it should be allowed. I really hope we never get the Icelandic model as it just ends up hurting the workers, especially the women.

It's like the minimum wage - it sound great, but when you think it through you realise it's a bad idea as it just hurts the workers.

I hope the OP comes back with details...

thefa

Strumms wrote: »

It’s a regular enough occurrence. So I doubt it’s illegal.

A company who I worked for linked pay increases with performance reviews. A good way of doing things if the reviews are done honestly, fairly and respectful of the policy and criteria. So in a team of ten you had nobody really earning the same .. even though they all had the same job title.

I always prefared rewarding performance monetarily as opposed to seeing which has happened... a couple of chronically underperforming bozos being overpaid due to length of service while younger people proved to be more dynamic, hard working and just better at their jobs yet getting less reward. That’s never an acceptable scenario.

Agree with the logic but believe there’s a downside since there’s often a human element at play, particularly where the goals and ratings aren’t clear cut, so the honesty and equity mentioned can take a hit. Relationship with the manager can have an impact on the review process. Small department size can affect the increment too.

dekbhoy

nthclare wrote: »

Those semistates are a joke with their pay scales and job's for the boy's etc it's sickening.

You'll see soon a lot of those places are going to be overhauled, Shannon Airport is a semistate and the only hard workers there I'm told are the hare's running around the rushes and the tumble weed's scraping across the runway.

Thats probably because theres tumble weed blowing through Shannon airport hence there is little or no work to do. Semi state of which im employed is a little busier but lets stay on topic please.

nthclare

dekbhoy wrote: »

I work for a semi state wholly unionised company where some employees doing exactly the same work with exactly the same title are on different pay levels. When arguing for pay equality and parity the companies and unions stance is nobody has right to tell an employee taking up a role what amount of money they can and cannot work for. its up to them if they want to sign the contract. joke but thats the way it is.
Perfectly legal.

Those semistates are a joke with their pay scales and job's for the boy's etc it's sickening.

You'll see soon a lot of those places are going to be overhauled, Shannon Airport is a semistate and the only hard workers there I'm told are the hare's running around the rushes and the tumble weed's scraping across the runway.

dekbhoy

I work for a semi state wholly unionised company where some employees doing exactly the same work with exactly the same title are on different pay levels. When arguing for pay equality and parity the companies and unions stance is nobody has right to tell an employee taking up a role what amount of money they can and cannot work for. its up to them if they want to sign the contract. joke but thats the way it is.
Perfectly legal.

Jim Root

Be careful throwing around the discrimination word unless it directly relates to one of the 9 no-no’s.

_Brian

jt69er wrote: »

Hi, just wondering if anyone has experienced Discrimination in Pay for the same work in their job. If so,and a complaint was made, was it resolved to the claimants satisfaction?

So unless its a union environment there is nothing can be done as no discrimination is heppening.

There is no law that states that two equal employees should/must be paid the same rates..

I've worked in many companies where wages would have been different depending on many factors such as hire date etc..

Just look to teachers and other public servants and you have same workers on different pay scales..

Strumms

It’s a regular enough occurrence. So I doubt it’s illegal.

A company who I worked for linked pay increases with performance reviews. A good way of doing things if the reviews are done honestly, fairly and respectful of the policy and criteria. So in a team of ten you had nobody really earning the same .. even though they all had the same job title.

I always prefared rewarding performance monetarily as opposed to seeing which has happened... a couple of chronically underperforming bozos being overpaid due to length of service while younger people proved to be more dynamic, hard working and just better at their jobs yet getting less reward. That’s never an acceptable scenario.

Mrs OBumble

Which of the nine grounds do you believe is leading to the discrimination?

If it's something else (prettier, fitter, more experience, the person is the manager's cousin). then it's allowed anywhere but in the civil service.

Vestiapx

jt69er wrote: »

Hi, just wondering if anyone has experienced Discrimination in Pay for the same work in their job. If so,and a complaint was made, was it resolved to the claimants satisfaction?

Do you mean two people doing the same job for the same amount of time and on different pay. I'm interested in this as I've been asked by a person who has much less time served but actually is more productive querying their lower pay. However in the civil service time served is clearly an allowed differential.