The gender pay gap in the ICT labour market: comparative experiences from the UK and New Zealand

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Belgorodskiy ◽  
Barbara Crump ◽  
Marie Griffiths ◽  
Keri Logan ◽  
Raja Peter ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Wendy Olsen ◽  
Vanessa Gash ◽  
Hein Heuvelman ◽  
Pierre Walthery
Keyword(s):  
Pay Gap ◽  

2020 ◽  
pp. 549-583
Author(s):  
David Cabrelli

This chapter examines the principle of equal pay for equal work enshrined in the Equality Act 2010 (EA). It first considers the stubbornness of the gender pay gap in the UK and the EU, as well as the justifications for intervention in the labour market via the auspices of equal pay laws. It goes on to discuss the legal machinery in the EA, which confers an entitlement on employees of one sex to the same remuneration as suitable employee comparators of the opposite sex. The focus then turns to the content of the ‘sex equality clause’—a term imposed into every employee’s contract of employment by virtue of section 66 of the EA. This is followed by a discussion of the material factor defence for employers in section 69 of the EA.


2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 705-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sian Moore ◽  
Stephanie Tailby

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore what has happened to the notion and reality of equal pay over the past 50 years, a period in which women have become the majority of trade union members in the UK. It does so in the context of record employment levels based upon women’s increased labour market participation albeit reflecting their continued over-representation in part-time employment, locating the narrowed but persistent overall gender pay gap in the broader picture of pay inequality in the UK. Design/methodology/approach – The paper considers voluntary and legal responses to inequality and the move away from voluntary solutions in the changed environment for unions. Following others it discusses the potential for collective bargaining to be harnessed to equality in work, a potential only partially realised by unions in a period in which their capacity to sustain collective bargaining was weakened. It looks at the introduction of a statutory route to collective bargaining in 2000, the National Minimum Wage from 1999 and at the Equality Act 2010 as legislative solutions to inequality and in terms of radical and liberal models of equality. Findings – The paper suggests that fuller employment based upon women’s increased labour market activity have not delivered an upward pressure on wages and has underpinned rather than closed pay gaps and social divisions. Legal measures have been limited in the extent to which they have secured equal pay and wider social equality, whilst state support for collective solutions to equality has waned. Its replacement by a statutory minimum wage initially closed pay gaps, but appears to have run out of steam as employers accommodate minimum hourly rates through the reorganisation of working time. Social implications – The paper suggests that statutory minima or even voluntary campaigns to lift hourly wage rates may cut across and even supersede wider existing collective bargaining agreements and as such they can reinforce the attack on collective bargaining structures, supporting arguments that this can reduce representation over pay, but also over a range of other issues at work (Ewing and Hendy, 2013), including equality. Originality/value – There are then limitations on a liberal model which is confined to promoting equality at an organisational level in a public sector subject to wider market forces. The fragmentation of bargaining and representation that has resulted will continue if the proposed dismantling of public services goes ahead and its impact upon equality is already suggested in the widening of the gender pay gap in the public sector in 2015.


2005 ◽  
Vol 115 (501) ◽  
pp. F81-F107 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Blackaby ◽  
Alison L Booth ◽  
Jeff Frank

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Nightingale

This article uses Labour Force Survey data to examine why male and female part-time employees in the UK are more likely to be low paid than their full-time counterparts. This ‘low pay penalty’ is found to be just as large, if not larger, for men compared to women. For both men and women, differences in worker characteristics account for a relatively small proportion of the part-time low pay gap. Of greater importance is the unequal distribution of part-time jobs across the labour market, in particular the close relationship between part-time employment and social class. Using a selection model to adjust for the individual’s estimated propensity to be in (full-time) employment adds a modest amount of explanatory power. Particularly for men, a large ‘unexplained’ component is identified, indicating that even with a similar human capital and labour market profile part-time workers are more likely than full-time workers to be low paid.


Author(s):  
Hazel Conley ◽  
Geraldine Healy ◽  
Pedro Martins ◽  
Stella Warren
Keyword(s):  
Pay Gap ◽  

This chapter aims to: give a clear understanding of gendered occupational segregation; demonstrate why it is an important issue for women today especially in terms of the persistent gender pay gap; discuss both horizontal and vertical segregation and how this impacts women in terms of pay, promotion, opportunities and society, through a lack of utilizing the whole of society’s workforce; and discuss men who work in female dominated industries and how men can benefit by their minority status, with an emphasis on the teaching profession. To give the reader a deeper and richer understanding of gendered occupational segregation outside of the SET sector, this chapter focuses on the UK’s finance sector. This sector is a particularly relevant and interesting sector to add to the discussions, as in both the UK and the USA, women hold an approximately equal percentage of the workforce as a whole, yet they are concentrated in the low paying, less prestigious jobs, and at the lower echelons of the sector.


Author(s):  
David Cabrelli

This chapter examines the principle of equal pay for equal work enshrined in the Equality Act 2010 (EA). It first considers the stubbornness of the gender pay gap in the UK and the EU, as well as the justifications for intervention in the labour market via the auspices of equal pay laws. It goes on to discuss the legal machinery in the EA, which confers an entitlement on employees of one sex to the same remuneration as suitable employee comparators of the opposite sex. The focus then turns to the content of the ‘sex equality clause’—a term imposed into every employee’s contract of employment by virtue of section 66 of the EA. This is followed by a discussion of the material factor defence for employers in section 69 of the EA.


2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Louise Jewell ◽  
Giovanni Razzu ◽  
Carl Singleton
Keyword(s):  
Pay Gap ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document