We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Equal pay -supermarkets
Comments
-
I have a good suggestion for this equal pay and that is to take all the store floor staff who think they should to a RDC and make them do a week of shifts there. I'm quite sure after working in -25C and humping THOUSANDS of lorry loads of goods about they'll figure out that no, they don't do anything like the same job.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0
-
Cases like this are basically demeaning to women.
It's saying "women can't work in a nasty cold warehouse, so you have to pay shop floor workings more so that women have equal pay"
The fact that women are more likely to work on the shop floor than a warehouse is entirely down to their personal choice. They are all free to apply for jobs in the warehouse.
Next it will be airline pilots will have their pay equalised with flight attendants because pilots are mostly men and attendants are mostly women, therefore they must both have equal pay otherwise it's sexism.Changing the world, one sarcastic comment at a time.0 -
John_G_Jones wrote: »Pay what, though? These cases are never actually about equal pay for equal work, companies pretty much all do that anyway. What they tend to be about is that someone has decreed that working on the checkouts is equivalent to doing the midnight to four a.m. shift cleaning out the mincing machines and so decided that the pay should be equal.
My point is that IF the case is ultimately successful, then there may well be some backpay due. And IF any backpay is due, it won't be up to each individual member of staff to somehow 'claim' it. It will be paid.They will pay out if the law tells them to pay out and currently that is not the case.
See example here.
Note I'm not talking about the merits of the case, I'm talking about what the OP needs to do. And frankly, the answer is nothing, because there is no result in the case.
However, joining a union would IMO be worthwhile, because if there is any reluctance on the part of the employer to pay what the court agrees is due, then it's good to have someone on your side. And you can bet that they will be keeping a careful eye on this and any similar cases.
If the OP intends to change their employment then I don't know, legally, what the situation is with making backpayments to former staff. But it's not been suggested that that's planned.Signature removed for peace of mind0 -
Its not about men v women. Its about equal pay for work of equal value.
Women have worked in RDC's for decades.0 -
Cases like this are basically demeaning to women.
It's saying "women can't work in a nasty cold warehouse, so you have to pay shop floor workings more so that women have equal pay"
The fact that women are more likely to work on the shop floor than a warehouse is entirely down to their personal choice. They are all free to apply for jobs in the warehouse.
Next it will be airline pilots will have their pay equalised with flight attendants because pilots are mostly men and attendants are mostly women, therefore they must both have equal pay otherwise it's sexism.
Drop the gender crap it has nothing to do with that.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0 -
To answer the OP's quesition - from the article (in relation as to whether a claim can be made right now)
The workers must still prove their roles are of equal value and, if they are, that there is no reason aside from sex discrimination that they should be paid equally.0 -
Drop the gender crap it has nothing to do with that.
I think the difficulty here is looking at some of the articles on the case it implies it is about gender because more men work in warehouses and more women on shop floor and linking it to gender pay gaps rather than different jobs.
On that front though I remember 12 years ago when I went for 2 weeks warehouse experience for a large store, I was told they had positions on shop floor or warehouse I said I wanted to do shop floor and the (female) boss kept trying to change my mind and say she thought I would be good in warehouse (even then when I was slim I was big built which would be another reason for warehouse work) I backed down and took it and had the worst 2 weeks of my life, a female I knew wanted to do warehouse and the same manager told her she would be good on shop floor.
As expected I did poorly, whilst the girl did well but hated doing the shop floor and admitted it to me got praised by management and offered a permanent job and I was told I didn't put effort in (I did but the miserable role got to me) felt upset at that comment she made actually.0 -
I think the difficulty here is looking at some of the articles on the case it implies it is about gender because more men work in warehouses and more women on shop floor and linking it to gender pay gaps rather than different jobs.
On that front though I remember 12 years ago when I went for 2 weeks warehouse experience for a large store, I was told they had positions on shop floor or warehouse I said I wanted to do shop floor and the (female) boss kept trying to change my mind and say she thought I would be good in warehouse (even then when I was slim I was big built which would be another reason for warehouse work) I backed down and took it and had the worst 2 weeks of my life, a female I knew wanted to do warehouse and the same manager told her she would be good on shop floor.
As expected I did poorly, whilst the girl did well but hated doing the shop floor and admitted it to me got praised by management and offered a permanent job and I was told I didn't put effort in (I did but the miserable role got to me) felt upset at that comment she made actually.
Oh I have seen those articles as well. Like anything that is reported we as individuals have a choice to further read up on it or just take what is said as gospel. People trotting out the gender angle are just being lazy and bias on how they perceive things.
With regards to your personal experience unfortunately people will still make judgments of others and think they know best for that person without actually getting to know them. All that employment law does is try to guide people to make the right decisions without discrimination. As individuals we just have to find our voice and be able to negotiate for the jobs we want and not be scared to walk away from a job that we are not happy in.This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com0 -
I think the difficulty here is looking at some of the articles on the case it implies it is about gender because more men work in warehouses and more women on shop floor and linking it to gender pay gaps rather than different jobs.
Ultimately, as its an equal pay claim, it is about gender. If the pay was down to different job weights between depot & store roles then ASDA would have defeated the claim at the first court case, that they haven't implies that either there is no difference in job weight or that ASDA's HR paperwork is pretty shoddy & doesn't let them prove there is0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards