Sexual discrimination/equal pay issue

hedger

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Hedger.

1: Refer to above post

2: He has VERY valid points on both market forces & qualifications

As for what the employer does you can pretty much bet they will take legal advice & if you do win you will not win the way you think.

As for your quote "then how has any equal pay case ever been won by a female?" I refer you back to my 2nd or 3rd post about an attempt to bring in new by Harriet Harman. People rarely win this arguement thats why the new law is being railroaded.


I look forward to reading more.

"2: He has VERY valid points on both market forces & qualifications" - what market forces? its hardly a really specialised field. plenty of candidates available when he was employed. the company wud have to PROVE "market forces"
qualifications - when he started he had a NEBSOH Cert, no degree (a requirement) and some H&S experience. The diploma was done later and only onbtained recently.My wife had NEBSOH certificate, degree and plenty of H&S experience. asked to do the diploma - rejected. I fail to see how experince and qualifications can be used in this case as a reasonable excuse. remember the company has to PROVE this to a tribunal to justify the huge gap in salary (if this is their GMF stated)

also the equality commission asked if there was other H&S advisors employed. there is 3 other guys (some not as well qualified as my wife)from the dept based on sites full time - IF it goes to tribunal the company would have to disclose their salaries (and I bet they are higher).

the only other GMF that I think they could use is "he negotiated a better deal" - I have shown a previous case where a court ruled this was not acceptable as a valid reason

bendix

hedger, you seem more interested in convincing yourself than other people.

In the end, the outcome will be whatever it will be and, frankly, I can see a trainwreck around the corner.

Pete111

Hi Hedger

I agree in part with Bendix....insofar as that both sides are quite um...entrenched? You will be unlikely to change peoples view on this one - it's obviously quite polarising.

If I were you I would save yourself some stress and concentrate your energies on the conversations with the people who will actually make a difference one way or the other on this one - ie the lawyers, the EC the company etc - rather than on random bods ontiniternet. It may be beneficial to your blood pressure!!

Do make sure you keep us updated tho!

1984ReturnsForReal_2

hedger wrote: »

"2: He has VERY valid points on both market forces & qualifications" - what market forces? its hardly a really specialised field. plenty of candidates available when he was employed. the company wud have to PROVE "market forces"
qualifications - when he started he had a NEBSOH Cert, no degree (a requirement) and some H&S experience. The diploma was done later and only onbtained recently.My wife had NEBSOH certificate, degree and plenty of H&S experience. asked to do the diploma - rejected. I fail to see how experince and qualifications can be used in this case as a reasonable excuse. remember the company has to PROVE this to a tribunal to justify the huge gap in salary (if this is their GMF stated)

also the equality commission asked if there was other H&S advisors employed. there is 3 other guys (some not as well qualified as my wife)from the dept based on sites full time - IF it goes to tribunal the company would have to disclose their salaries (and I bet they are higher).

the only other GMF that I think they could use is "he negotiated a better deal" - I have shown a previous case where a court ruled this was not acceptable as a valid reason

I suppose 12+ years recruiting in fields covering this & other areas means I know nothing.

You are looking to sue & to sue & win.

Let me tell you something. Across over 90% (generalisation but I know its the case so +/- 5% would give you the figure) of the market place professional qualifications pay.

Thats a free piece of information & no matter what you say will change it.

His higher qualification is a qualification directly related to his job.

You are trying to convince yourself you are right in every angle.

Best of luck.

woody01

Spirit wrote: »

The issue is about equal pay not about H&S qualifications alone. Your responses are getting increasingly rude to other well informed posters and the OP. The OP has come here for advice on what will be a tricky issue. If these balanced and helpful answers are not to your liking perhaps you could start a discussion about health & safety qualifications on the discussion time board.

To the OP, there is a lot of wise guidance on here - stick with it.

Spirit

Surely you can see how 'UNWISE' you advice is?
It has everything to do with qualifications. This is one area where it is INCREDIBLY likely to have an effect on salary.

You also have the opinion. like many here, where if someone does not put their arm around someone and tell them what they want to hear, you dismiss them as being incorrect and the troll accusations start flying.

Your post quoted above just proves how little about the problem the OP is having you actually know.

Pete111

Woody01. Purely out of interest, what is it you do for a living?

hedger

Pete111 wrote: »

Woody01. Purely out of interest, what is it you do for a living?

i think hes my wifes director

Pete111

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

hedger wrote: »

"2: He has VERY valid points on both market forces & qualifications" - what market forces? its hardly a really specialised field. plenty of candidates available when he was employed. the company wud have to PROVE "market forces"
qualifications - when he started he had a NEBSOH Cert, no degree (a requirement) and some H&S experience. The diploma was done later and only onbtained recently.My wife had NEBSOH certificate, degree and plenty of H&S experience. asked to do the diploma - rejected. I fail to see how experince and qualifications can be used in this case as a reasonable excuse. remember the company has to PROVE this to a tribunal to justify the huge gap in salary (if this is their GMF stated)

also the equality commission asked if there was other H&S advisors employed. there is 3 other guys (some not as well qualified as my wife)from the dept based on sites full time - IF it goes to tribunal the company would have to disclose their salaries (and I bet they are higher).

the only other GMF that I think they could use is "he negotiated a better deal" - I have shown a previous case where a court ruled this was not acceptable as a valid reason

1) You are basing his salary on when he started. Maybe he had the intelligence to ask for a payrise every so often?

2) Why do you bet they are higher?

3) It is acceptable as a valid reason. I will bet the court case you refer to isnt a precedent and had other factors.

Frankly all your doing here is jumping your wife above this guy in the redundancy queue.

woody01

hedger wrote: »

i think hes my wifes director

If i was, i wouldve sacked her long before now for the moaning.

Pete111 wrote: »

Woody01. Purely out of interest, what is it you do for a living?

I run a large multi-national.
Before that i implemeted DSEAR Regulations.