BBC Womens pay gap
Discussion
Funk said:
Cathy just doesn't learn: https://twitter.com/cathynewman/status/97713948660...
Interestingly this time it's an ad-hominem attack. That's to add to all the other logical fallacies she peppered the interview with.
She fell for the old asking a question in the headline trap. The answer is always no. Interestingly this time it's an ad-hominem attack. That's to add to all the other logical fallacies she peppered the interview with.
With the deadline for companies to declare any gender pay gap just hours away, the BBC were running this story as a lead item on their breakfast news this morning.
A few minutes after 6AM really isn't the time to be shouting at the hotel's telly, so apologies to the room next door - I switched over to a music channel soon after.
One of the examples given by the earnest McGovern was Ryanair who pay their male employees more than their female staff. Shocking behaviour - until the story expanded into revealing that it was the (mostly male) pilots who were paid more than cabin crew. Apples/oranges? Apples/cucumber, more like.
Why this non-story is being given so much exposure is a puzzle to me.
A few minutes after 6AM really isn't the time to be shouting at the hotel's telly, so apologies to the room next door - I switched over to a music channel soon after.
One of the examples given by the earnest McGovern was Ryanair who pay their male employees more than their female staff. Shocking behaviour - until the story expanded into revealing that it was the (mostly male) pilots who were paid more than cabin crew. Apples/oranges? Apples/cucumber, more like.
Why this non-story is being given so much exposure is a puzzle to me.
Becoming a large PR problem for companies
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43632763
One university had a pay policy based upon clear criteria, seniority, how often involved in research etc. This produced a "gender pay gap". Which they "solved" by giving their female professors an across the board £5K pay rise regardless of merit.
Most businesses can not afford this. They will respond, but as pointed out in my earlier post, the manner of their response is likely to disappoint all the vocal women looking for the same money for less work.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43632763
One university had a pay policy based upon clear criteria, seniority, how often involved in research etc. This produced a "gender pay gap". Which they "solved" by giving their female professors an across the board £5K pay rise regardless of merit.
Most businesses can not afford this. They will respond, but as pointed out in my earlier post, the manner of their response is likely to disappoint all the vocal women looking for the same money for less work.
Cold said:
With the deadline for companies to declare any gender pay gap just hours away, the BBC were running this story as a lead item on their breakfast news this morning.
A few minutes after 6AM really isn't the time to be shouting at the hotel's telly, so apologies to the room next door - I switched over to a music channel soon after.
One of the examples given by the earnest McGovern was Ryanair who pay their male employees more than their female staff. Shocking behaviour - until the story expanded into revealing that it was the (mostly male) pilots who were paid more than cabin crew. Apples/oranges? Apples/cucumber, more like.
Why this non-story is being given so much exposure is a puzzle to me.
Its s shown up almost every week on the BBC news site. Every time a big company reports their results. A few minutes after 6AM really isn't the time to be shouting at the hotel's telly, so apologies to the room next door - I switched over to a music channel soon after.
One of the examples given by the earnest McGovern was Ryanair who pay their male employees more than their female staff. Shocking behaviour - until the story expanded into revealing that it was the (mostly male) pilots who were paid more than cabin crew. Apples/oranges? Apples/cucumber, more like.
Why this non-story is being given so much exposure is a puzzle to me.
How much as this pointless project cost the economy in admin costs?
All for pointless information which can be easily explained away by any mediocre psychologist.
It is completely pointless. My firm didn't show up too badly but then, as a partnership, partner's salaries weren't included because they don't have one...
There have been a lot of discussions here about it though and the general consensus is that men and women are different, do different jobs and therefore get paid differently. That said, it is also believed that men are much more likely to ask for payrises, promotions and more responsibility than women and there will be "active measures" to create a culture where women are equally as confident in this area.
I have to say though, sitting on the train this morning at 6.30 I noticed that 99% of the passengers around me were men. Maybe if women put a bit more effort to get in early they would get paid more...
There have been a lot of discussions here about it though and the general consensus is that men and women are different, do different jobs and therefore get paid differently. That said, it is also believed that men are much more likely to ask for payrises, promotions and more responsibility than women and there will be "active measures" to create a culture where women are equally as confident in this area.
I have to say though, sitting on the train this morning at 6.30 I noticed that 99% of the passengers around me were men. Maybe if women put a bit more effort to get in early they would get paid more...
JagLover said:
Most businesses can not afford this. They will respond, but as pointed out in my earlier post, the manner of their response is likely to disappoint all the vocal women looking for the same money for less work.
Equality of outcome has a habit of coming back to bite. Just look at what happened when equality of outcome was applied to state pension age.......I wonder will women be as keen if equality of outcome is ever applied to equalise things like the workplace death gender gap, the 'working in s
tty/dangerous jobs' gender gap, the 'commuting 3 hours each way to work' - or 'having to live away from home during the week' gender gap........
Will those things also be spun as discrimination against women - just like the state pension age equalisation was.
One of the worst "offenders" is Ryan Air with about a 70% difference.
The majority of their UK employees are aircrew, so the difference is driven by the number of male pilots, and female cabin crew. As long as there are no barriers to entry (so its choice of profession) then the options are fairly limited.
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
At least when BBC were reporting it they countered the moral outrage with an expert who dismissed gender vs pay as a pointless metric. They said you must also compare the type of work, hours worked, skill levels etc.
The majority of their UK employees are aircrew, so the difference is driven by the number of male pilots, and female cabin crew. As long as there are no barriers to entry (so its choice of profession) then the options are fairly limited.
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
At least when BBC were reporting it they countered the moral outrage with an expert who dismissed gender vs pay as a pointless metric. They said you must also compare the type of work, hours worked, skill levels etc.
98elise said:
One of the worst "offenders" is Ryan Air with about a 70% difference.
The majority of their UK employees are aircrew, so the difference is driven by the number of male pilots, and female cabin crew. As long as there are no barriers to entry (so its choice of profession) then the options are fairly limited.
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
Yep. The thing is - when they do try and socially engineer the recruitment process, it only ever seems to go one way...... "encourage more women into the roles dominated by men".The majority of their UK employees are aircrew, so the difference is driven by the number of male pilots, and female cabin crew. As long as there are no barriers to entry (so its choice of profession) then the options are fairly limited.
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
You don't see many instances of the reverse "encourage more men into the roles dominated by women".
I suspect the reason is - they can't be seen to be encouraging male competition for 'women's jobs'. By encouraging men into jobs dominated by women - it would likely result in less women getting these jobs - and that in itself would be seen as anti women.
The end result is very one sided.
98elise said:
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
Or you just accept it is what it is.I think it is pretty disingenuous for these feminist women to make out women don't make lifestyle choices based on what they consider a decent work/lifestyle balance.
There is a huge pay gap between men, some simply don't want to be CEOs and work 24/7, 365 days a year and not spend time with their wife or kids, out of my peer group of 8 or 9 really good friends, only one of them is like that, most have a pretty balanced work/home lifestyles.
The pay gap between us all is about 10x, some on £25k a year and some on £250k+.
I know for a fact the one on £25k simply doesn't want more responsibility or to leave the job he loves, he was offered a consultancy role last year which would have doubled or even tripled his wage, but he wanted too stick with what he was doing as he was happy. I actually know someone who he works under, he is on 4x what my mate earns doing a very similar role, the main difference is he writes reports for the customers, he may be earning more, but he is always working late, never does anything with his family as weekends he is knackered and generally seems pretty stressed all the time. But his choice as he wants better money.
On Sunday, two of the girls who we were discussing this who thought there was an issue, and I should mention they are both single, and not had kids yet, teachers as well so probably in a lefty echo chamber at work all day too, couldn't answer me this.
Should all professional footballers be paid the same wage?
That is taking gender out of the equation and just saying, same job, same money?
That is apparently different.
Edited by gizlaroc on Wednesday 4th April 09:11
Jonathan Pie interviews a feminist writer.
(It's Pie. Consider yourself forewarned)
The Gender Pay Gap - YouTube
(It's Pie. Consider yourself forewarned)
The Gender Pay Gap - YouTube
Moonhawk said:
I wonder will women be as keen if equality of outcome is ever applied to equalise things like the workplace death gender gap
I was pretty sure this was a thing and Googled it this morning just to see if I was right.FFS!
97% of all deaths in the workplace are male.
Now that is some gender inequality to shout about.
The biggest issue is that the 'problem' has been reduced to its simplest element and (wrongly) argued on that basis. It's been dumbed down so stupid people can be agitated into outrage that "women get paid less than men", however anyone with a modicum of common sense will realise that there are many, many reasons why pay differences exist and you can't focus on just gender; you have to look at ALL the reasons why different people get paid different amounts.
It's just frustrating that companies respond to frothy-mouthed numbskulls on social media and fan their flames in an effort to be seen to be 'doing the right thing'.
FFS!
97% of all deaths in the workplace are male.
Now that is some gender inequality to shout about.Or the stty, harsh job roles that only ever seem to be done by men, rather than in a swish, comfy air-conditioned city-centre office on your company-issue Macbook Air...
It's just frustrating that companies respond to frothy-mouthed numbskulls on social media and fan their flames in an effort to be seen to be 'doing the right thing'.
brrapp said:
Moonhawk said:
I wonder will women be as keen if equality of outcome is ever applied to equalise things like the workplace death gender gap
I was pretty sure this was a thing and Googled it this morning just to see if I was right.FFS!
97% of all deaths in the workplace are male.
Now that is some gender inequality to shout about.
tty, harsh job roles that only ever seem to be done by men, rather than in a swish, comfy air-conditioned city-centre office on your company-issue Macbook Air...Edited by Funk on Wednesday 4th April 09:45
Equality of opportunity should be the norm, providing the outcome parameters are met without compromise.
Sky News is having the gender pay gap as their daily discussion point. So far they've had guests, women, spouting utter bks without anyone questioning back. Simply making stuff up. I turned over.
If they can't be analytical and reasonable, I can't be bothered to listen.
Sky News is having the gender pay gap as their daily discussion point. So far they've had guests, women, spouting utter b
ks without anyone questioning back. Simply making stuff up. I turned over. If they can't be analytical and reasonable, I can't be bothered to listen.
Mothersruin said:
Equality of opportunity should be the norm, providing the outcome parameters are met without compromise.
Sky News is having the gender pay gap as their daily discussion point. So far they've had guests, women, spouting utter bks without anyone questioning back. Simply making stuff up. I turned over.
If they can't be analytical and reasonable, I can't be bothered to listen.
Analytical and reasonable doesn't fit the agenda.Sky News is having the gender pay gap as their daily discussion point. So far they've had guests, women, spouting utter b
ks without anyone questioning back. Simply making stuff up. I turned over. If they can't be analytical and reasonable, I can't be bothered to listen.
It's intensely frustrating that the tough conversations never actually get going because a screeching minority don't like the truth and it isn't what they want to hear.
98elise said:
One of the worst "offenders" is Ryan Air with about a 70% difference.
The majority of their UK employees are aircrew, so the difference is driven by the number of male pilots, and female cabin crew. As long as there are no barriers to entry (so its choice of profession) then the options are fairly limited.
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
At least when BBC were reporting it they countered the moral outrage with an expert who dismissed gender vs pay as a pointless metric. They said you must also compare the type of work, hours worked, skill levels etc.
Ryanair is an extreme example, but worth looking at for the immense practical difficulties involved.The majority of their UK employees are aircrew, so the difference is driven by the number of male pilots, and female cabin crew. As long as there are no barriers to entry (so its choice of profession) then the options are fairly limited.
You either pay pilots and cabin crew the same, or you only social engineer your recruitment process.
At least when BBC were reporting it they countered the moral outrage with an expert who dismissed gender vs pay as a pointless metric. They said you must also compare the type of work, hours worked, skill levels etc.
The number of female pilots worldwide is between 4-5% of the total. You cannot click your fingers and have more equal representation in even the medium term.
Airlines used to be fairly reliant on the military to train their pilots, not sure if that is still the case, but if it is Ryanair may not be even able to train the female pilots to equalize ratios.
How then would Ryanair be able to reduce its "gender pay gap". More male cabin crew would be one suggestion. Not sure as well why the check in people need to be employed by a specific airline. If this were contracted out by all airlines that would probably help as well.
Neither of which helps entitled middle class women, but is at least achievable.
brrapp said:
Moonhawk said:
I wonder will women be as keen if equality of outcome is ever applied to equalise things like the workplace death gender gap
I was pretty sure this was a thing and Googled it this morning just to see if I was right.FFS!
97% of all deaths in the workplace are male.
Now that is some gender inequality to shout about.
However, we mustn't forget that "every day is mens day" (the risible Jess Philips) and that mainstream comments such as "Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat" (Hillary Clinton) being perfectly acceptable will mean these gender gaps won't be considered for a long time to come!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff