Challenging pay comparing against colleague

ILW

Why is it being assumed that the difference is down to gender? There seem to be many other factors here, such as route to current position.

warez22

I agree that it might not be down to gender, but how can you justify someone who has worked for the company for 6 years being paid so much more than someone who has worked for the company in its various formats for 15?

Same qualifications, I have more experience, better results, but am part time and a working mum.....

ILW

warez22 wrote: »

I agree that it might not be down to gender, but how can you justify someone who has worked for the company for 6 years being paid so much more than someone who has worked for the company in its various formats for 15?

Same qualifications, I have more experience, better results, but am part time and a working mum.....

It is common in all sorts of industries that the ones who have been there the longest get paid the least. Companies tend to have to pay new blood more.

scheming_gypsy

They don't need to justify it that's his wage and that's your wage.
Back to a previous job; team leaders were on 21k but when they started recruiting new ones, externally, they were coming in at 28k. When I left I saw my job advertised at 6k more than I was on when I left and they wouldn't have increased everybody else's either.

Although looking back. you worked for company A when it was taken over by company B and he already worked for company B. So he was probably already on a higher wage and that point.

AP007

warez22 wrote: »

I agree that it might not be down to gender, but how can you justify someone who has worked for the company for 6 years being paid so much more than someone who has worked for the company in its various formats for 15?

Same qualifications, I have more experience, better results, but am part time and a working mum.....

It is sometimes called 'if your face fits'. Other person may be a crawler etc Putting on you and your experience and they get paid more. It happens.

persa

warez22 wrote: »

I agree that it might not be down to gender, but how can you justify someone who has worked for the company for 6 years being paid so much more than someone who has worked for the company in its various formats for 15?

Same qualifications, I have more experience, better results, but am part time and a working mum.....

Possibly when he joined, he negotiated a better starting salary. Maybe the company was short staffed at the time and had to pay over the odds.

Do you both do the same percentage of unpaid overtime? Possibly an expectation of more hours is built into his remuneration? In my experience, full time workers tend to get saddled with unpaid overtime. It's not always the case, but it's what I've seen in my profession.

If the reasoning behind the pay gap is gender, that's bloody awful, but you haven't said anything to suggest as much. Unless there's also a blokey culture? Do you get that sort of feeling on a day-to-day basis?

warez22

He does no unpaid overtime, but neither do I.

Because he was already there when our Company joined, people do still tend to approach him over me for things.

I think it is more to do with the fact that I am part time and definitely feel less valued as a result.

I have talked to him about it and he doesn't agree with it either and he himself told me to bring my excellent performance up.

ILW

warez22 wrote: »

He does no unpaid overtime, but neither do I.

Because he was already there when our Company joined, people do still tend to approach him over me for things.

I think it is more to do with the fact that I am part time and definitely feel less valued as a result.

I have talked to him about it and he doesn't agree with it either and he himself told me to bring my excellent performance up.

Doubt if he would agree to his salary being cut to be in line with yours though.

warez22

That is very true!

DKLS

I was on an interview panel recently, we had ten roles to fill which were advertised at 21-34k.

8 of those hired started on 21k and two started on 34k.

The difference ? Quite simply two candidates asked for and could justify the top end of the scale, the others simply didnt bring up salary at all.