Earlier today, we told our London readers that the trade unions are in a terrible panic - what we've just learned is how badly rattled they are - as word reaches us about spoiler adverts appearing in local newspapers.
Unison and the GMB are placing rival adverts in some local papers - telling their members to steer clear of Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross.
Well we take that as a great compliment - it just goes to show how frightened they are of us - because we are simply doing what the unions should have been doing years ago.
The unions are the ones who have lost their low members thousands of pounds per person - the unions are the ones who have said next to nothing on equal pay for years - until we come along and let the cat out of the bag.
Unison and GMB should be ashamed that their women members only know about the big pay differences between traditional male and female jobs - because of Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross.
The unions speak with forked tongues on equal pay - they face different ways at the same time - they talk a good fight when it suits them - but the truth is they've sat on their backsides for the past 10 years.
They have let their lowest paid members down - and they don't speak for the many thousands of workers who are not even union members.
Wednesday, 23 April 2008
A Sign of Panic
Our clients in London tell us that the trade unions are up to their usual tricks.
Having sat on their backsides for years and kept people in the dark about equal pay - as soon as Action 4 Equality comes along - they start putting out scare stories about our fees.
The latest one is that anybody seeking to pursue a claim with Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross must pay £500 up front before we will take on their case - but this is a complete lie.
No one has to pay a single penny up front - and we only charge a fee if we deliver a successful outcome - whereas the unions have been taking their members contributions for years - and achieved precisely nothing. If anything, things have got worse!
The unions peddle the same nonsense all the time - to stop people making equal pay claims - not to help their members.
And what a cheek - coming from the same geniuses who have cost their members thousands of pounds over the past 10 years - by continuing to favour traditional male jobs within London councils.
So, don't believe the propaganda of desperate trade unions hacks - they are on the run because of Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross - and because they have little else to say, they make up lies and rumours which they know to be false.
What they should be asking their members (and non-union members) is:
"DO YOU REALISE THAT YOUR JOB IS PAID £3 OR £4 PER HOUR LESS THAN A COUNCIL REFUSE WORKER OR GARDENER - AND THAT YOU HAVE AN EQUAL PAY CLAIM WORTH THOUSANDS OF POUNDS?"
But rather than tell their members the truth - the unions would rather divert attention away from their own shameful track record.
The only people telling union members and non-union members what their rights are on equal pay - are Action 4 Equality London and Stefan Cross.
Having sat on their backsides for years and kept people in the dark about equal pay - as soon as Action 4 Equality comes along - they start putting out scare stories about our fees.
The latest one is that anybody seeking to pursue a claim with Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross must pay £500 up front before we will take on their case - but this is a complete lie.
No one has to pay a single penny up front - and we only charge a fee if we deliver a successful outcome - whereas the unions have been taking their members contributions for years - and achieved precisely nothing. If anything, things have got worse!
The unions peddle the same nonsense all the time - to stop people making equal pay claims - not to help their members.
And what a cheek - coming from the same geniuses who have cost their members thousands of pounds over the past 10 years - by continuing to favour traditional male jobs within London councils.
So, don't believe the propaganda of desperate trade unions hacks - they are on the run because of Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross - and because they have little else to say, they make up lies and rumours which they know to be false.
What they should be asking their members (and non-union members) is:
"DO YOU REALISE THAT YOUR JOB IS PAID £3 OR £4 PER HOUR LESS THAN A COUNCIL REFUSE WORKER OR GARDENER - AND THAT YOU HAVE AN EQUAL PAY CLAIM WORTH THOUSANDS OF POUNDS?"
But rather than tell their members the truth - the unions would rather divert attention away from their own shameful track record.
The only people telling union members and non-union members what their rights are on equal pay - are Action 4 Equality London and Stefan Cross.
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
Union News
As always happens, when Action 4 Equality appears on the scene - we are contacted by local unions reps who have been starved of information and given bad advice for years.
London is just the same as everywhere else - most local unions reps are just trying to do their best for their members - but few of them are experts in equal pay or know the history of the Single Status agreement.
It's the union hierarchy that's responsible for keeping ordinary members in the dark - few local union reps are aware that traditional male groups (refuse workers, road workers and gardeners) have been paid big bonuses for many years.
And it comes as a big surprise for them to find this out from Action 4 Equality - but when you think about it the unions are hardly likely to tell their women members or local reps - because it's the same union people who have been favouring the male groups for years.
There would be a lynching party if the unions shouted this from the rooftops - because it's the female dominated jobs that should have benefited from Single Status - but in many areas it's the female dominated jobs that are losing out.
So, the unions are rightly embarrassed about how they've behaved - and how they've let their women members down.
But we don't mind whether you're a union member, a non-union member or a local union rep - we treat everyone in exactly the same way - and we're happy to take up your equal pay claim on that basis.
London is just the same as everywhere else - most local unions reps are just trying to do their best for their members - but few of them are experts in equal pay or know the history of the Single Status agreement.
It's the union hierarchy that's responsible for keeping ordinary members in the dark - few local union reps are aware that traditional male groups (refuse workers, road workers and gardeners) have been paid big bonuses for many years.
And it comes as a big surprise for them to find this out from Action 4 Equality - but when you think about it the unions are hardly likely to tell their women members or local reps - because it's the same union people who have been favouring the male groups for years.
There would be a lynching party if the unions shouted this from the rooftops - because it's the female dominated jobs that should have benefited from Single Status - but in many areas it's the female dominated jobs that are losing out.
So, the unions are rightly embarrassed about how they've behaved - and how they've let their women members down.
But we don't mind whether you're a union member, a non-union member or a local union rep - we treat everyone in exactly the same way - and we're happy to take up your equal pay claim on that basis.
Friday, 18 April 2008
Redbridge News
According to our clients in Redbridge, the council is putting it about that there's no money set aside to pay for implementing Single Status.
So, the less than subtle message to the workforce is: "Don't get your hopes up!"
Now this is exactly why people should bang in an equal pay claim - because the employers and the trade unions are now trying to introduce Single Status on the cheap.
In many parts of the country, the employers and trade unions have gone to the workforce with an agreed Single Status package - only for union members to reject what's on offer - when they realise they're being invited to buy a pig in a poke.
In North Lanarkshire and Fife councils - to name but two councils in Scotland - the trade unions did the employers dirty work by recommending their members to accept lousy Single Status deals.
But the workforce saw through what was happening and voted against the their union leaders advice.
The employers always say the cupboard is bare - and that they don't have enough money to pay up. Don't believe what they say - they've had 10 long years to plan for Single Status and how to end their discriminatory pay and grading structures.
If they introduce new arrangements that are just as bad as the old ones - the employers are open to challenge. And so are the unions - if they're foolish enough agree to such proposals.
Our advice is not to trust people who have failed to keep their promises for all these years - they'll just try and cheat you out of what you're really due.
So, don't delay - demand equal pay today!
So, the less than subtle message to the workforce is: "Don't get your hopes up!"
Now this is exactly why people should bang in an equal pay claim - because the employers and the trade unions are now trying to introduce Single Status on the cheap.
In many parts of the country, the employers and trade unions have gone to the workforce with an agreed Single Status package - only for union members to reject what's on offer - when they realise they're being invited to buy a pig in a poke.
In North Lanarkshire and Fife councils - to name but two councils in Scotland - the trade unions did the employers dirty work by recommending their members to accept lousy Single Status deals.
But the workforce saw through what was happening and voted against the their union leaders advice.
The employers always say the cupboard is bare - and that they don't have enough money to pay up. Don't believe what they say - they've had 10 long years to plan for Single Status and how to end their discriminatory pay and grading structures.
If they introduce new arrangements that are just as bad as the old ones - the employers are open to challenge. And so are the unions - if they're foolish enough agree to such proposals.
Our advice is not to trust people who have failed to keep their promises for all these years - they'll just try and cheat you out of what you're really due.
So, don't delay - demand equal pay today!
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
How do I start a claim?
All we need to get your equal pay claim started is some basic information - to get things moving all we require is your:
1 Full name
2 Address
We will then send you further information in the post - to explain how your case will be handled - and a separate (About You) form to gather additional information about your job/employer.
You can set the ball rolling by phoning Action 4 Equality London on 0845 300 3 800 or by e-mailing your (1, 2 and 3) details to: markirvine@compuserve.com
1 Full name
2 Address
3 Post Code
A contact phone number and/or e-mail address are useful - but not essential at this stage.We will then send you further information in the post - to explain how your case will be handled - and a separate (About You) form to gather additional information about your job/employer.
You can set the ball rolling by phoning Action 4 Equality London on 0845 300 3 800 or by e-mailing your (1, 2 and 3) details to: markirvine@compuserve.com
Why only 6 years back pay?
One of the most frequent questions people ask is: "If Single Status goes back to 1998, why do I have a claim for only 6 instead of 10 years back pay?"
The answer is that the law of the land - The Statute of Limitations - prevents people from going back in time more than 6 years in a dispute over financial matters.
So, people's claims are limited to a maximum of 6 years in terms of back pay - when common sense and fairness suggests that 10 years should apply.
In Scotland, the position is even worse - the Statute of Limitations runs to only 5 years north of the border - because Scotland has its own legal system and rules.
However, this statutory restriction normally just serves to make people even angrier - because it's the combined failure of the employers and the trade unions - that's cost so many women workers the additional 4 years.
And to add insult to injury - the unions and the employers are still trying to pull the wool over people's eyes:
But 6 years is a hell of a lot better than nothing at all - and that's exactly what was on offer - until Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross came along.
The answer is that the law of the land - The Statute of Limitations - prevents people from going back in time more than 6 years in a dispute over financial matters.
So, people's claims are limited to a maximum of 6 years in terms of back pay - when common sense and fairness suggests that 10 years should apply.
In Scotland, the position is even worse - the Statute of Limitations runs to only 5 years north of the border - because Scotland has its own legal system and rules.
However, this statutory restriction normally just serves to make people even angrier - because it's the combined failure of the employers and the trade unions - that's cost so many women workers the additional 4 years.
And to add insult to injury - the unions and the employers are still trying to pull the wool over people's eyes:
- by failing to explain the true value of their claims
- by encouraging their members not to rock the boat
- by allowing their members to accept poor 'one-off ' settlements
- by continuing to favour the male workers on issues like protection - so the women lose out again
But 6 years is a hell of a lot better than nothing at all - and that's exactly what was on offer - until Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross came along.
Monday, 14 April 2008
Secondary Claims (2)
No sooner do we post some information about Secondary Claims than people get in touch to ask: What is my claim worth?
Well the answer is it depends on the size of the pay gap with your comparator - i.e. the male job that you can compare your job to - and, if necessary, persuade an employment tribunal that your job deserves to be paid the same - certainly not thousands of pounds less.
In a previous post (dated 11 April) we used the example of a Home Carer to illustrate the likely size of a full-time employee's claim: £3.00 per hour x 37 hours = £111.00 per week x 52 weeks = £5,772 + interest.
So, if councils are protecting the higher pay of the male workers for 3 years your claim is worth: £5,772 x 3 = £17,316 + interest
If your own council protects the higher pay of the male workers for 4 years your claim is worth: £5,772 x 4 = £23,088 + interest.
And if your council has decided to protect the higher pay of the male workers indefinitely (as some have done) your claim is worth: £5,772 a year for many years to come!
The same is true of part-time workers - who have exactly the same rights as full-time workers - so just pro-rata your hours over the working year - and that explains the basis of your Secondary Claim.
Well the answer is it depends on the size of the pay gap with your comparator - i.e. the male job that you can compare your job to - and, if necessary, persuade an employment tribunal that your job deserves to be paid the same - certainly not thousands of pounds less.
In a previous post (dated 11 April) we used the example of a Home Carer to illustrate the likely size of a full-time employee's claim: £3.00 per hour x 37 hours = £111.00 per week x 52 weeks = £5,772 + interest.
So, if councils are protecting the higher pay of the male workers for 3 years your claim is worth: £5,772 x 3 = £17,316 + interest
If your own council protects the higher pay of the male workers for 4 years your claim is worth: £5,772 x 4 = £23,088 + interest.
And if your council has decided to protect the higher pay of the male workers indefinitely (as some have done) your claim is worth: £5,772 a year for many years to come!
The same is true of part-time workers - who have exactly the same rights as full-time workers - so just pro-rata your hours over the working year - and that explains the basis of your Secondary Claim.
Secondary Claims
Councils around the country follow the same predictable pattern in dealing with equal pay - after years of sitting on their backsides.
First, they try and 'buy out' key groups of staff (normally just some of the manual workers) - with very poor offers of settlement - which they bully and pressurise people into accepting without the benefit of proper advice.
Second, they don't explain that the higher pay of the traditional male groups is being protected for years into the future - because continuing to favour the men is itself discriminatory and simply leads to further claims.
Some councils are protecting the men's higher rates of pay for 3 or 4 years - others indefinitely!
But while the pay gap between male and female jobs continues to exist - people can still raise an equal pay claim - even if they have already accepted an offer of settlement.
The employers' don't want their employees to understand what's going on - after all they've kept them in the dark for the past 10 years - why would they change now?
The unions should be advising their members that they have perfectly good claims - so long as there is a pay gap between male and female jobs. But the unions are completely compromised because they have agreed the protection arrangements which favour the traditional male jobs.
So, our advice is that - even if you have accepted an offer of settlement - don't accept second best - don't accept being paid less than the male dominated jobs for years into the future.
First, they try and 'buy out' key groups of staff (normally just some of the manual workers) - with very poor offers of settlement - which they bully and pressurise people into accepting without the benefit of proper advice.
Second, they don't explain that the higher pay of the traditional male groups is being protected for years into the future - because continuing to favour the men is itself discriminatory and simply leads to further claims.
Some councils are protecting the men's higher rates of pay for 3 or 4 years - others indefinitely!
But while the pay gap between male and female jobs continues to exist - people can still raise an equal pay claim - even if they have already accepted an offer of settlement.
The employers' don't want their employees to understand what's going on - after all they've kept them in the dark for the past 10 years - why would they change now?
The unions should be advising their members that they have perfectly good claims - so long as there is a pay gap between male and female jobs. But the unions are completely compromised because they have agreed the protection arrangements which favour the traditional male jobs.
So, our advice is that - even if you have accepted an offer of settlement - don't accept second best - don't accept being paid less than the male dominated jobs for years into the future.
Saturday, 12 April 2008
Job Evaluation - Friend or Foe?
Job evaluation - in theory at least - is about establishing a fair and sensible 'rank order' of jobs -based on an objective assessment of their relative skill and responsibilities.
So, the jobs with most skill and responsibility are at the top on the pay and grading structure - and those with less skill and responsibility end up lower down the pay ladder.
Job evaluation was a fundamental part of the 1998 Single Status agreement - which required UK councils to assess all their jobs under a new, modern and non-discriminatory job evaluation scheme (JES).
The agreement recognised that many female dominated jobs had been undervalued for years - and so they were expected to be the big winners from Single Status.
But things didn't work out the way they were intended - the employers and the unions lost their nerve because this meant tackling the vested interests inside their respective organisations.
Everyone expected that Single Status would lead to big pay increases for many female dominated jobs - but this also meant that the traditionally better paid male jobs would have to 'mark time' or stand still - while women workers caught in the pay stakes.
The unions and employers simply failed to implement this crucial part of Single Status - and the significance of what was happening was kept hidden from a largely female workforce.
Until Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross arrived on the scene and let the cat out the bag - by explaining to women workers how badly they had been let down.
Now the employers are in a panic - across the UK they're trying to introduce job evaluation in a great rush and on the cheap - and often at the expense of female employees whom Single Status was supposed to help.
Many of the new JE schemes now being introduced are producing some decidedly odd results - many female jobs are faring badly compared to the traditional male jobs - which is the exact opposite of what you would expect.
The reality is that pay discrimination is still widespread - despite what the employers and unions say. So, if job evaluation is being bulldozed through by your council, get some proper advice and help - from Action 4 Equality London.
So, the jobs with most skill and responsibility are at the top on the pay and grading structure - and those with less skill and responsibility end up lower down the pay ladder.
Job evaluation was a fundamental part of the 1998 Single Status agreement - which required UK councils to assess all their jobs under a new, modern and non-discriminatory job evaluation scheme (JES).
The agreement recognised that many female dominated jobs had been undervalued for years - and so they were expected to be the big winners from Single Status.
But things didn't work out the way they were intended - the employers and the unions lost their nerve because this meant tackling the vested interests inside their respective organisations.
Everyone expected that Single Status would lead to big pay increases for many female dominated jobs - but this also meant that the traditionally better paid male jobs would have to 'mark time' or stand still - while women workers caught in the pay stakes.
The unions and employers simply failed to implement this crucial part of Single Status - and the significance of what was happening was kept hidden from a largely female workforce.
Until Action 4 Equality and Stefan Cross arrived on the scene and let the cat out the bag - by explaining to women workers how badly they had been let down.
Now the employers are in a panic - across the UK they're trying to introduce job evaluation in a great rush and on the cheap - and often at the expense of female employees whom Single Status was supposed to help.
Many of the new JE schemes now being introduced are producing some decidedly odd results - many female jobs are faring badly compared to the traditional male jobs - which is the exact opposite of what you would expect.
The reality is that pay discrimination is still widespread - despite what the employers and unions say. So, if job evaluation is being bulldozed through by your council, get some proper advice and help - from Action 4 Equality London.
Friday, 11 April 2008
Home Carers
We've had a lot of calls this week from Home Carers - asking for an explanation about the basis of their equal pay claims.
Home Carers last had their jobs evaluated and graded back in 1988 - at that time they were placed on Manual Worker Grade 5 - a relatively high grade - certainly higher than many traditional male jobs such as Refuse Driver (Grade 4), Refuse Collector (Grade 2) or a Road Sweeper (Grade 1).
Yet, these male jobs were all paid big bonuses on top of their basic pay - which were never paid to the female dominated jobs.
So, despite being on a higher grade, Home Carers were actually being paid much less in terms of take home pay - with the men earning an extra 50% or so routinely every week - a practice which the unions, of course, kept hidden from their women members.
In financial terms, a Home Carer has been working for about £6 an hour - for the past 6 years - while these traditional male jobs have been earning £9 + an hour - even though they do lower graded work.
A full-time Home Carer with 6 years service has a claim worth well over £30,000 - £3.00 per hour x 37 (hours per week) = £111.00 x 52 (weeks of the year) = £5,772 x 6 (years back pay claim) = £34,632 + interest on top.
That's how much more the traditional male jobs have been paid over the past 6 years - and that's why Home Carers and so many other groups have such sizeable claims.
The employers and the unions said they would sort this out 10 years ago - and didn't keep their word - they are now trying to clear up a mess of their own making - but in doing so they're still trying to avoid paying the female dominated jobs what they're really worth.
Home Carers last had their jobs evaluated and graded back in 1988 - at that time they were placed on Manual Worker Grade 5 - a relatively high grade - certainly higher than many traditional male jobs such as Refuse Driver (Grade 4), Refuse Collector (Grade 2) or a Road Sweeper (Grade 1).
Yet, these male jobs were all paid big bonuses on top of their basic pay - which were never paid to the female dominated jobs.
So, despite being on a higher grade, Home Carers were actually being paid much less in terms of take home pay - with the men earning an extra 50% or so routinely every week - a practice which the unions, of course, kept hidden from their women members.
In financial terms, a Home Carer has been working for about £6 an hour - for the past 6 years - while these traditional male jobs have been earning £9 + an hour - even though they do lower graded work.
A full-time Home Carer with 6 years service has a claim worth well over £30,000 - £3.00 per hour x 37 (hours per week) = £111.00 x 52 (weeks of the year) = £5,772 x 6 (years back pay claim) = £34,632 + interest on top.
That's how much more the traditional male jobs have been paid over the past 6 years - and that's why Home Carers and so many other groups have such sizeable claims.
The employers and the unions said they would sort this out 10 years ago - and didn't keep their word - they are now trying to clear up a mess of their own making - but in doing so they're still trying to avoid paying the female dominated jobs what they're really worth.
Wednesday, 9 April 2008
Action 4 Equality
For anyone who wants to know more about the background to equal pay - there's a wealth of information on our Scotland web site which can be found at -
www.action4equalityscotland.blogspot.com
The Scotland site has been up and running for more than a year - so a considerable archive of material has built up over the past fifteen months - there's lots to read about including:
www.action4equalityscotland.blogspot.com
The Scotland site has been up and running for more than a year - so a considerable archive of material has built up over the past fifteen months - there's lots to read about including:
- individual case studies
- questions and issues raised by clients
- examples of bad behaviour from both employers and trade unions
If you have a query about equal pay in London, e-mail the details to Mark Irvine who will be happy to respond: markirvine@compuserve.com
Saturday, 5 April 2008
Pensions and Equal Pay
Female dominated council jobs experience a 'double whammy' when it comes to equal pay - not only have they been paid less for many years, but this blatant discrimination continues when people reach retirement age.
Take a Home Carer and Refuse Driver, for example. Assume both jobs are full-time and that the female carer is paid £12,000 a year - while the refuse worker gets £18,000 a year - which gives a typical pay gap of around £6,000 per annum (or £3.00 per hour) based on our experience in other parts of the UK.
So, the woman's equal pay claim is to close the gap of £3.00 per hour and to recover the £6,000 a year - although this can only go back 6 years in total - so the back pay claim is for £36,000 plus interest.
But people's retirement benefits are based on their final salary - so again the women lose out. The maximum benefits under the pension scheme are for half of your final salary and three times your annual pension as a lump sum.
So, the refuse worker (on maximum benefits) would get £9,000 a year as a pension plus £27,000 (3 x £9,000) by way of a lump sum.
The home carer, on the other hand, would get only £6,000 a year as a pension plus £18,000 (3 x £6,000) by way of a lump sum. So, if she lives for 20 years after retiring, the carer loses out again - by a whopping £69,000 (20 x £3,000 = £60,000 + £9,000 difference in the lump sums)
That's the reason why so many people are waking up to the fact that they have an equal pay claim - and understanding the difference a successful claim could make to their lives.
The employers and unions, by the way, should be ashamed of themselves - for keeping this information hidden from a largely female council workforce.
Take a Home Carer and Refuse Driver, for example. Assume both jobs are full-time and that the female carer is paid £12,000 a year - while the refuse worker gets £18,000 a year - which gives a typical pay gap of around £6,000 per annum (or £3.00 per hour) based on our experience in other parts of the UK.
So, the woman's equal pay claim is to close the gap of £3.00 per hour and to recover the £6,000 a year - although this can only go back 6 years in total - so the back pay claim is for £36,000 plus interest.
But people's retirement benefits are based on their final salary - so again the women lose out. The maximum benefits under the pension scheme are for half of your final salary and three times your annual pension as a lump sum.
So, the refuse worker (on maximum benefits) would get £9,000 a year as a pension plus £27,000 (3 x £9,000) by way of a lump sum.
The home carer, on the other hand, would get only £6,000 a year as a pension plus £18,000 (3 x £6,000) by way of a lump sum. So, if she lives for 20 years after retiring, the carer loses out again - by a whopping £69,000 (20 x £3,000 = £60,000 + £9,000 difference in the lump sums)
That's the reason why so many people are waking up to the fact that they have an equal pay claim - and understanding the difference a successful claim could make to their lives.
The employers and unions, by the way, should be ashamed of themselves - for keeping this information hidden from a largely female council workforce.
Friday, 4 April 2008
Admin & Clerical Staff
We've had lots of enquiries from Admin & Clerical workers - asking how they're affected by all this equal pay business.
The answer is quite simple - Admin & Clerical staff have the same basic claim as anyone else because - like most female dominated council jobs - this group has been badly undervalued and underpaid for years.
Many admin and clerical jobs are paid around grade GS3 on the old APT& C pay scales - that's not much more than £7.00 an hour for work that requires:
The female dominated jobs are paid around £7.00 per hour - but the male jobs get between £9 - £12.00 per hour - and that's the way things have been for years.
The employers don't want their women workers to know what's been going on because - quite rightly - people will bang in an equal pay claim once they realise how badly they've been conned over the years.
And the unions don't want their women members to know what's been going on either - because the women will obviously ask: "What the hell have we been paying our union dues for all these years?"
That's why there's been a conspiracy of silence from both the employers and the trade unions - because they've negotiated, but kept hidden, the much higher rates of pay for the traditional male jobs - and that's completely unfair to the rest of a predominantly female workforce.
But the good news is that Action 4 Equality has let the genie out of the bottle - and now there's no going back to the bad old days - when women workers were kept deliberately in the dark.
The answer is quite simple - Admin & Clerical staff have the same basic claim as anyone else because - like most female dominated council jobs - this group has been badly undervalued and underpaid for years.
Many admin and clerical jobs are paid around grade GS3 on the old APT& C pay scales - that's not much more than £7.00 an hour for work that requires:
- Good basic qualifications
- Good reading and writing skills
- Interpersonal, organisational and team working skills
- Post school qualifications - and often high level IT and computer skills
The female dominated jobs are paid around £7.00 per hour - but the male jobs get between £9 - £12.00 per hour - and that's the way things have been for years.
The employers don't want their women workers to know what's been going on because - quite rightly - people will bang in an equal pay claim once they realise how badly they've been conned over the years.
And the unions don't want their women members to know what's been going on either - because the women will obviously ask: "What the hell have we been paying our union dues for all these years?"
That's why there's been a conspiracy of silence from both the employers and the trade unions - because they've negotiated, but kept hidden, the much higher rates of pay for the traditional male jobs - and that's completely unfair to the rest of a predominantly female workforce.
But the good news is that Action 4 Equality has let the genie out of the bottle - and now there's no going back to the bad old days - when women workers were kept deliberately in the dark.
News from Haringey
Reports from Haringey suggest the council is following the same well trodden path of making really poor 'buy out' offers to some manual workers - which don't deliver equal pay for the workers concerned - while leaving out many other groups such as Admin & Clerical workers, Classroom Assistants etc.
The employers and the unions usually band together at these times - and ask people to be patient - which is really rich coming from the same folk who said they would sort equal pay out 10 years ago!
Action 4 Equality's advice is don't delay - you will almost certainly be disappointed by the outcome of any ongoing job evaluation review - our experience is that the female dominated jobs always do badly out of these exercises - especially when councils do them in a great hurry and on the cheap.
Once you register an equal pay claim - you automatically trigger a 6 year claim for back pay (if you have 6 years service) - but the clock doesn't start running until your claim is up and running.
So, any delay is costing you money - and that's a very good reason for not hanging around - waiting on the employers to sort things out.
Who knows, at the present rate, it could take them another 10 years!
The employers and the unions usually band together at these times - and ask people to be patient - which is really rich coming from the same folk who said they would sort equal pay out 10 years ago!
Action 4 Equality's advice is don't delay - you will almost certainly be disappointed by the outcome of any ongoing job evaluation review - our experience is that the female dominated jobs always do badly out of these exercises - especially when councils do them in a great hurry and on the cheap.
Once you register an equal pay claim - you automatically trigger a 6 year claim for back pay (if you have 6 years service) - but the clock doesn't start running until your claim is up and running.
So, any delay is costing you money - and that's a very good reason for not hanging around - waiting on the employers to sort things out.
Who knows, at the present rate, it could take them another 10 years!
Thursday, 3 April 2008
Classroom and Teaching Assistants
Classroom and Teaching Assistants have fared particularly badly - when it comes to councils implementing new pay and grading structures.
For years these predominantly female jobs have been paid much less than traditional male jobs such as refuse workers or gardeners - some of whom are paid £10 - £12 per hour.
The Single Status agreement (see post dated 17 March) was supposed to sort that out in 1998 - or at least very soon afterwards.
But classroom and teaching assistants have been exploited ever since - even though the skills and responsibilities of their jobs are clearly much greater, if anything, than the jobs done traditionally by male council workers.
Some London councils are now introducing new pay and grading structures - after a job evaluation exercise - one that considers (objectively) the content of all the individual council jobs and comes up with a sensible and agreed formula for what they should all be paid.
Job evaluation is supposed to make things fairer - in theory at least - and the original aim (in 1998) was to properly reward the skills of the female dominated jobs which had been losing out for years.
But around the country - not just in London - the story is exactly the same: job evaluation is a bad joke.
Jobs like classroom and teaching assistants end up on the same grade as refuse collectors and unskilled gardeners - and on even lower grades (and less pay) than the chap that drives the bin lorry!
That's why so many people have an equal pay claim - because often job evaluation is often just about maintaining the status quo.
Instead of tackling the widespread pay discrimination - that people still can see with their own eyes - the pay gap between male and female council jobs is a great as ever.
So, spread the word - and let your friends and co-workers know.
For years these predominantly female jobs have been paid much less than traditional male jobs such as refuse workers or gardeners - some of whom are paid £10 - £12 per hour.
The Single Status agreement (see post dated 17 March) was supposed to sort that out in 1998 - or at least very soon afterwards.
But classroom and teaching assistants have been exploited ever since - even though the skills and responsibilities of their jobs are clearly much greater, if anything, than the jobs done traditionally by male council workers.
Some London councils are now introducing new pay and grading structures - after a job evaluation exercise - one that considers (objectively) the content of all the individual council jobs and comes up with a sensible and agreed formula for what they should all be paid.
Job evaluation is supposed to make things fairer - in theory at least - and the original aim (in 1998) was to properly reward the skills of the female dominated jobs which had been losing out for years.
But around the country - not just in London - the story is exactly the same: job evaluation is a bad joke.
Jobs like classroom and teaching assistants end up on the same grade as refuse collectors and unskilled gardeners - and on even lower grades (and less pay) than the chap that drives the bin lorry!
That's why so many people have an equal pay claim - because often job evaluation is often just about maintaining the status quo.
Instead of tackling the widespread pay discrimination - that people still can see with their own eyes - the pay gap between male and female council jobs is a great as ever.
So, spread the word - and let your friends and co-workers know.
Tuesday, 1 April 2008
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 3
Can I be disciplined or victimised for pursuing an equal pay claim?
No, definitely not - not least because any employer foolish enough to behave in that way would leave themselves wide open to a separate claim for victimisation.
The damages for a successful victimisation claim are unlimited - the sky's the limit when it comes to financial compensation in such cases.
So, even the worst employers are afraid to dig an even deeper hole for themselves by giving their employees a hard time - especially when all that people are doing is enforcing their legal rights to equal pay and fair treatment at the workplace.
No, definitely not - not least because any employer foolish enough to behave in that way would leave themselves wide open to a separate claim for victimisation.
The damages for a successful victimisation claim are unlimited - the sky's the limit when it comes to financial compensation in such cases.
So, even the worst employers are afraid to dig an even deeper hole for themselves by giving their employees a hard time - especially when all that people are doing is enforcing their legal rights to equal pay and fair treatment at the workplace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
