To pay rise or not to pay rise, that is the question

Hot on the heels of yesterday’s blog post about women on boards, and the frankly ridiculous things a few people appointing – or rather not appointing –  women onto boards said, I wanted to touch on the issue of gender pay.

This has clearly been a hot topic recently with the Government’s introduction of mandatory gender pay reporting, although post some high profile media coverage – which seemed to focus on a few big companies and criticism of the ways the reporting has been structured – it feels a bit like its fallen away.

I have been very fortunate to formally and informally mentor a few exceptional women in recent years and consistently, unsurprisingly, navigating promotions and pay arise as constant themes. Regardless of gender, it is clearly something that comes up again and again whilst working.

A lot has been written about gender differences in pay. The survey my charity Young Women’s Trust did of 800 HR professionals actually found that the majority (67%) didn’t think there was a difference between men and women in relation to ambition, though 25% did think men were more ambitious. In relation to asking for pay rises though, the number who thought gender didn’t make a difference dropped to 51%, with 39% saying male employees were more likely to speak up.

Some light Google-based research shows that the actual evidence about gender-based differences in approaches to pay is more of a mixed bag. A study by the University of Wisconsin, Warwick and the Cass Business School found no difference in the likelihood of asking for a pay rise between genders, but you can also find articles citing studies, like one from global market research firm Mintel published earlier this year, which found that women report being half as confident as men at asking for more pay.

Continue reading

‘I don’t think women fit comfortably into the board environment’… bullsh*t

I should start this blog by saying a bloody big bravo (or rather brava) to the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy for yesterday publishing a list of the worst explanations they received from FTSE 350 CEOs and Chairs for not having more women on their boards and calling bullsh*t on their excuses.

The gems that made the list included ‘I don’t think women fit comfortably into the board environment’,‘ we have one woman already on the board, so we are done – it is someone else’s turn’ and ‘the issues covered (by the board) are extremely complex’.

In case you were wondering whether we’d finally succeeded in time travel back to the dark ages, no, its still 2018. And yes, I did say FTSE 350 CEOs and Chairs. And no to the owner of the last comment, women’s brain are not hard wired to be less capable than men’s. My various WhatsApp groups and Twitter timeline were quite rightly full of rage, a proud, loud and well-justified ‘angry feminist’ response.

Continue reading

GALs and Visonaries*

As I mentioned on Friday, I’ve just finished reading Mary Beard’s ‘Women and Power: A Manifesto’ (which has now been book-napped by my mother, and I will be taking back for a second read very soon!) It really took me by surprise. I wasn’t expecting to have such light sharply shone on things about the relationship between women and power, or how women in power are treated, that I’ve either never noticed or had never thought about the implications of.

On Friday I wrote about how powerful women through history were often made more ‘masculine’, or effectively had their femininity removed, in order to make them more acceptable, just like the ancient Greek goddess Anthea. I mentioned there was one other thing that had struck me reading the book.

That was the discussion about women speaking about women’s issues. And how Mary brings into question whether this is done just because women want to, or because this is the ‘safe’ space we are allowed to comfortably occupy, front and centre, in the public sphere. She looks back – obviously – to the ancient Greeks and the Romans and the few examples of women who were allowed to “publicly defend their own sectional interests, but not speak for men or the community as a whole” and even then only in “extreme examples”. She also points to a few more modern-day examples where the public speeches made by women which we hold up and laud are often women speaking about ‘women’s issues’. The implication being that the well known speeches made by men in contrast are much more diverse.

Continue reading