Challenging pay comparing against colleague

Southend1

ILW wrote: »

Guess I have just spent a lot of my working life (mainly sales and recruitment) with women who were more than capable and would find your attitude that they need help rather demeaning.
Most had very little time for other women who were "weak" and used their gender as an excuse.

Hang on a minute, you're putting words in my mouth there.

I never said anyone was less than capable or "weak" or used their gender as an excuse for anything.

You find my attitude demeaning to women because you have not understood the sociological and psychological context of the issues and are making a very simplistic interpretation.

jacques_chirac

Missme wrote: »

Perhaps advocate was the wrong choice of word. What I meant is that women, and whatever other disadvantaged group, need a collective voice because there is strength in numbers.

People learn to operate under all sorts of constraints in all sorts of circumstances. They adapt to survive. That doesn't make the circumstance fair and all I'm arguing is that things should be fair.

So I disagree that my attitude holds women back but if you see being pro equity and empowerment in that way then that's your opinion.

Empowerment is not being a collective voice, empowerment is learning to speak up for yourself. To suggest that women need to be part of a group to get their voices heard is an attitude that should have been left in the 80's!

Southend1 wrote: »

Hang on a minute, you're putting words in my mouth there.

I never said anyone was less than capable or "weak" or used their gender as an excuse for anything.

You find my attitude demeaning to women because you have not understood the sociological and psychological context of the issues and are making a very simplistic interpretation.

Having worked in senior roles, having had to negotiate my salary, I find your attitude demeaning towards women. My experience is based on real life, not what I have read in some book.

Southend1

jacques_chirac wrote: »

Empowerment is not being a collective voice, empowerment is learning to speak up for yourself. To suggest that women need to be part of a group to get their voices heard is an attitude that should have been left in the 80's!



Having worked in senior roles, having had to negotiate my salary, I find your attitude demeaning towards women.

I find being part of a collective e.g. A trade union or a local community association can be very empowering.

You find my attitude to women demeaning because you have worked in senior roles and had to negotiate your pay? I don't understand how your personal employment history has any relation to anything I've said here on the subject of equal opportunities. Could you clarify?

jacques_chirac

Southend1 wrote: »

I find being part of a collective e.g. A trade union or a local community association can be very empowering.

You find my attitude to women demeaning because you have worked in senior roles and had to negotiate your pay? I don't understand how your personal employment history has any relation to anything I've said here on the subject of equal opportunities. Could you clarify?

I am aware of how women are treated at senior levels. I am also aware that most women are more than capable of speaking up for themselves. We don't need to negotiate en masse to get results.

Are you suggesting men need to be in a group to be empowered also, or are they ok by themselves?

SueC_2

Southend1 wrote: »

The point is that there doesn't have to be any intention to discriminate for illegal discrimination to actually take place.

Much like there doesn't have to be any intention to cause offence for offence to be caused. And much of what you are saying is proving offensive to several of the women on here.

AP007

jacques_chirac wrote: »

I am aware of how women are treated at senior levels. I am also aware that most women are more than capable of speaking up for themselves. We don't need to negotiate en masse to get results.

Are you suggesting men need to be in a group to be empowered also, or are they ok by themselves?

Yeah the men join a union

jacques_chirac

AP007 wrote: »

Yeah the men join a union

You make a good point AP007 - some posters seem to think you can't do anything without a union behind you!

Southend1

SueC wrote: »

Much like there doesn't have to be any intention to cause offence for offence to be caused. And much of what you are saying is proving offensive to several of the women on here.

I'm very sorry that you have chosen to take offence at my support for gender equality. In order to avoid any further bad feeling I suggest you refrain from reading my posts on this thread or block my username.

On the other hand you could choose to recognise that there are a number of different viewpoints being expressed here by various people with the intention of having a sensible discussion and either join in or choose not to.

AP007

jacques_chirac wrote: »

You make a good point AP007 - some posters seem to think you can't do anything without a union behind you!

Surely you mean behind every good man there is a good woman?:D

Southend1

jacques_chirac wrote: »

I am aware of how women are treated at senior levels. I am also aware that most women are more than capable of speaking up for themselves. We don't need to negotiate en masse to get results.

Are you suggesting men need to be in a group to be empowered also, or are they ok by themselves?

The evidence does not support the view you have formed based on your personal experience. For a start, there is still a gender pay gap and this is wider in non unionised workplaces/industries. Also, on average, union members are paid around 16% more than non union members in the UK.

Please stop putting words into my mouth. I did not suggest that anyone NEEDS to be part of a group to be empowered, I simply said that I personally find it can be empowering to be part of a group.