No idea about my firm but expect it to be high. 6 out of 8 partners are male, and all the secretaries and most other business services are female (except those in management and IT positions). Probably a similar story for other law firms. As for a like Vs like comparison, not sure. People don't discuss salaries generally. Don't expect a major disparity
17.4% difference apparently, however I am inclined to believe this is incorrect as we have a strict pay banding structure unless it's legacy salaries as we have a lot of staff who have been here a long time.
Is this salaries for exactly the same jobs ie female partners earning less than male partners or a comparison across different roles based purely on gender?
Around 18% mean and 3% median difference in favour of men.
But the whole process is flawed - it is about equality of opportunity, not equal pay. Equal pay is same job, same pay - and we are absolutely that. But we have more men in higher paid roles, hence the difference.
The football club has a difference far greater than above - a men's professional football club pays men more than women? No shit Sherlock!
Is this salaries for exactly the same jobs ie female partners earning less than male partners or a comparison across different roles based purely on gender?
Overall difference not like for like, but there is some further breakdown of the figures. Won't tell you if there is like for like disparity, but gives some indication of the gender balance amongst roles I suppose, such as whether the better paying jobs tend to be male.
Is this salaries for exactly the same jobs ie female partners earning less than male partners or a comparison across different roles based purely on gender?
It absolutely shocks me that a male CEO who’s worked 40 years at the same company earns more than the female cleaner that’s been here 3 months. What the hell is going on.
Unimpressed with the government minister on BBC this morning, Apparently the government will 'review 'what will happen after a year to see what has happened, Minister for Equalities: Baroness Williams of Trafford . In true Sir Humphrey style, she spoke on an organisation that itself that has been dragged through the select committee, but woman still 9.3% less than men.
Around 18% mean and 3% median difference in favour of men.
But the whole process is flawed - it is about equality of opportunity, not equal gap. Equal pay is same job, same pay - and we are absolutely that. But we have more men in higher paid roles, hence the difference.
The football club has a difference far greater than above - a men's professional football club pays men more than women? No shit Sherlock!
This...with knobs on. The whole reporting process is meaningless as its comparing apples with pears.
If someone starts in my Department after I've been there for five years, I could have amassed yearly wage increases for my work effort whilst the female that starts will naturally start on the basic amount so will be lower.
Also like to add that I've had seven managers (in five roles) in the last 10-years and only on to my second male boss. Think I've actually worked with more women in my Departments over the years actually... Certainly been the only bloke in some teams
Would also like to add that I became a Team Leader a few years ago (earning two promotions), despite having senior women in front of me, yet I managed to jump above them in the hierarchy because they went on Maternity Leave... Women choosing to do that will always be an easy argument for men. Yet all those who do it will run the risk of someone junior getting ahead of them in the work place ladder
Apparently CAFC only pay the men 8.4% more than the women.
Bit concerned with that tbh!
Wonder if that would include the Playing Staff...
By law it would have to include playing staff as they are on the payroll. But I'm not sure of the Company structure and it may be that the playing staff are employed by a separate entity that has less than 250 employees, in which case that entity would not have to report. A Group of companies only has to report those entities within the group that employ more than 250 staff.
Got to agree with @bobmunro the question is do women get the same opportunity as men? And if they do, do they take it?
My work for example, did have a third of female partners (3 of 9), but one has just left. Of those three, two didn't have kids and one has a husband who looks after the kids.
In terms of other fee earners and support staff, a few women left to have kids and came back part time, a couple of those also have been promoted since. Also, 4 men have had kids since I've been here. Two were male partners and took a couple of weeks off, two were non-partner fee earners. One of them (me) took two weeks holiday due to not being there long enough for parental leave, then went part time when wife went back to work, other fella took 6 months paternity leave and came back part time. We've both been promoted since.
Has anyone been held back by having kids? Hard to tell. I'm in no hurry to put in extra hours as a partner, and my wife wants to work, so I prefer the work life balance.
Is there equal opportunity? It really does depend on the culture of the firm, what they consider in terms of who to promote, and also the drive and ambition of the individual. Pretty sure when the maths is looked at, there isn't a massive difference like for like between the genders.
Too many variables to be taken seriously. Lots of jobs are traditionally men or women only for very good reasons even if we like to pretend otherwise. It’s been illegal to discriminate since before I left school. Women and men get paid the same for the same job but this survey isn’t asking that. It’s a nonsense government waffle load of tosh. 8.4% in my place that passes for work. But there are very valid reasons for this.
In my company the male and female designers are paid the same if the have the same experience. As an aside.......... My...er...'friends' company is recruiting and his boss said make sure you employ a fella because at the moment they have 3 women on maternity leave, 2 for the second time and they are pissed off paying twice for the same role.
My company has quite a big gender pay gap. They're really pushing to get more women in senior roles. There are other factors that get overlooked in the headlines such as 90% of those working reduced hours in the company being women. Pay equality is less of an issue as we have a strict grade pay structure that means men and women starting the same job at the same time get paid the same
It would make a difference of more men took paternity leave for 6 months. Means women wouldn't be away for so long. Only really works if men and women in a couple earned similar amounts to begin with (we could never have afforded me to not work for 6 months)
In my company the male and female designers are paid the same if the have the same experience. As an aside.......... My...er...'friends' company is recruiting and his boss said make sure you employ a fella because at the moment they have 3 women on maternity leave, 2 for the second time and they are pissed off paying twice for the same role.
Firms don't pay twice as you can claim maternity pay back from the Gov.
In my company the male and female designers are paid the same if the have the same experience. As an aside.......... My...er...'friends' company is recruiting and his boss said make sure you employ a fella because at the moment they have 3 women on maternity leave, 2 for the second time and they are pissed off paying twice for the same role.
Firms don't pay twice as you can claim maternity pay back from the Gov.
In my company the male and female designers are paid the same if the have the same experience. As an aside.......... My...er...'friends' company is recruiting and his boss said make sure you employ a fella because at the moment they have 3 women on maternity leave, 2 for the second time and they are pissed off paying twice for the same role.
Firms don't pay twice as you can claim maternity pay back from the Gov.
The majority of pay yes, in time, however in my friends company I understand that the people employed to cover maternity have to be trained, its a niche market, so theres a cost there, also they take weeks if not months to get up to speed, and when the ladies come back to the work place post maternity pay, they then had to be re-trained at a further cost. I giuess the company have worked it out that they lose money hence his boss asking for a fella to be employed.
Comments
Or have I misinterpreted the threads about the accounts ?
But the whole process is flawed - it is about equality of opportunity, not equal pay. Equal pay is same job, same pay - and we are absolutely that. But we have more men in higher paid roles, hence the difference.
The football club has a difference far greater than above - a men's professional football club pays men more than women? No shit Sherlock!
Bit concerned with that tbh!
If someone starts in my Department after I've been there for five years, I could have amassed yearly wage increases for my work effort whilst the female that starts will naturally start on the basic amount so will be lower.
Also like to add that I've had seven managers (in five roles) in the last 10-years and only on to my second male boss. Think I've actually worked with more women in my Departments over the years actually... Certainly been the only bloke in some teams
Would also like to add that I became a Team Leader a few years ago (earning two promotions), despite having senior women in front of me, yet I managed to jump above them in the hierarchy because they went on Maternity Leave... Women choosing to do that will always be an easy argument for men. Yet all those who do it will run the risk of someone junior getting ahead of them in the work place ladder
My last manager was on £53k as she let slip when saying everyone she hired was on exactly £10k less than her... Except me I was on 16k less
My work for example, did have a third of female partners (3 of 9), but one has just left. Of those three, two didn't have kids and one has a husband who looks after the kids.
In terms of other fee earners and support staff, a few women left to have kids and came back part time, a couple of those also have been promoted since. Also, 4 men have had kids since I've been here. Two were male partners and took a couple of weeks off, two were non-partner fee earners. One of them (me) took two weeks holiday due to not being there long enough for parental leave, then went part time when wife went back to work, other fella took 6 months paternity leave and came back part time. We've both been promoted since.
Has anyone been held back by having kids? Hard to tell. I'm in no hurry to put in extra hours as a partner, and my wife wants to work, so I prefer the work life balance.
Is there equal opportunity? It really does depend on the culture of the firm, what they consider in terms of who to promote, and also the drive and ambition of the individual. Pretty sure when the maths is looked at, there isn't a massive difference like for like between the genders.
and too right8.4% in my place that passes for work. But there are very valid reasons for this.
As an aside..........
My...er...'friends' company is recruiting and his boss said make sure you employ a fella because at the moment they have 3 women on maternity leave, 2 for the second time and they are pissed off paying twice for the same role.