female gender pay gap? does it exist and how to work it out?

66 posts / 0 new
Last post
Marigold's picture
Marigold
Offline
Joined: 22-09-11
Jun 18 2015 22:55

The gender paygap is real. Across all jobs, all sectors. formal and informal economy.Is this thread for real???!!

Fleur
Offline
Joined: 21-02-12
Jun 18 2015 23:02

Marigold

Quote:
The gender paygap is real. Across all jobs, all sectors. formal and informal economy.Is this thread for real???!!

The OP was a persistent, misogynist troll. I don't think anyone else on this thread refutes that the gender pay gap is real, or that there are other factors which play into it, such as race and class. Just the fuckwit who started the thread.

plasmatelly's picture
plasmatelly
Offline
Joined: 16-05-11
Jun 19 2015 06:49

The OP is probably a 13 year old boy.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Jun 20 2015 00:07
plasmatelly wrote:
The cleaners parity struggle wasn't just confined to one area - it was national. Basically it was a national council joint agreement problem; women workers doing exactly the same job were paid less than their male counterparts. But that is only half the story - unions (and overwhelming Unison) sided with the bosses (in this case the councils) paying lip service to the workers whilst secretly bricking it that councils like Birmingham went bankrupt. I have first hand experience of the union convenor back then warning other trades to avoid talking to solicitors (and named them by name) that had taken the case on by women disaffected by Unison's bullshit. Unison sided with the boss by making a deal to reimburse the workers the money they were owed by cutting a deal based on what the councils were prepared to pay - as opposed to what they were owed (which would include interest). Ahe pressure that Unison and their gimpy mates from other business unions put on those who opted for the full amount was nothing less than bullying, and it gave me pleasure to hear that some of the people I worked with won the full amount and interest, whilst sadly others stuck it out with Unison and got stitched up.

well I can sympathise with this but don't think this is reflective of the national picture.

While it was a national problem, single status agreements were negotiated on a branch by branch basis, as councils are all individual employers. And different councils are all very different. In some councils for example single status hardly had any impact as most of the male manual grade jobs like refuse workers were all outsourced.

In terms of the issue you mention, that is more to do with negotiation. If you try and negotiate a payoff for people, often you get a bit less than what might be the maximum they could win through the courts. But the payoff is that a: the workers definitely get it, b: workers can get it right away rather than possibly years later after court battles, c: the employers have no right of appeal like they do if you win it through the courts and d: solicitors don't take a cut.

A lot of private solicitors sued unions who negotiated single status agreements, and won on the basis you mention. However this wasn't good for workers, as the lawyers took a big chunk of the winnings, plus costs.

All the law firms that got in on this weren't doing this for the benefit of working people, but to line their own pockets (not that the unions were totally selfless, but in the main part they were negotiations led by lay reps). I don't doubt that in some areas they got a crap deal, however I don't think your post is reflective of the general situation across the country.

plasmatelly's picture
plasmatelly
Offline
Joined: 16-05-11
Jun 20 2015 13:02

Steven wrote:

Quote:
All the law firms that got in on this weren't doing this for the benefit of working people, but to line their own pockets (not that the unions were totally selfless, but in the main part they were negotiations led by lay reps). I don't doubt that in some areas they got a crap deal, however I don't think your post is reflective of the general situation across the country

.
I'm not suggesting at all that using the courts should be anyone's first point of call - and clearly the solicitors who descended on these groups of workers were doing so for profit. What I am saying is the unions were not fighting for the money owed but were playing the classic mediator role appeasing both sides of a conflict, but this time wholeheartedly supporting the bosses.
If you can show me where workers came off as good or as near as damn it to the settlements achieved by the court route, I'd be interested to hear. I took a special interest in this struggle as it went on around me with people I worked alongside, but it may be as you say there were some examples of Unison fighting hard and winning the money they were owed as opposed to an offer.
On the issue of money owed - and especially in this conflict - this isn't like negotiating a pay deal or a lay-off, this is money owed. The unions, lay-reps or otherwise who didn't fight this on this basis were leaning in favour of the bosses even before they started.