|
 In the 1970s the concept of ‘equality’ at work came onto the horizon. Within just a few years, we had legislation on equal pay, sex discrimination and race discrimination. And equality at work has been talked about ever since.
With so much talk over 40+ years you would think that the task of achieving equality should be relatively straightforward. But its not and we haven’t achieved it! The pay gap continues, the glass ceiling at some point became for some a ceiling made of durable and robust Perspex and tribunal cases for sex discrimination (as well as numerous other types of discrimination) steadily rise in number (and value) year on year, so it’s a rare organisation that can stand up and say’ we cracked it’!
Two things come to mind at this point:-
- In the early 90’s equal pay legislation was rocked when it was established that dinner ladies had suffered direct discrimination as a result of lower rates of pay than refuse collectors
- How can we have had so many years of the ultimate role model being a woman (i.e. prime minister) but seemingly to continue to make such small strides forward with equality issues?
With regard to the dinner ladies and refuse collectors – the refuse collectors being the ‘male comparator’ that was put forward for the equal pay claim – I know they won their claim, but I would just love to know if the dinner ladies did genuinely feel that their roles were comparable to those of the refuse collectors or whether they just chose to accept what the unions told them. For my part the two roles still do not FEEL comparable (hours, skills, working conditions, attitude etc) and as such in my mind – engaging emotionally and not logically - the equal pay legislation has no credibility. Does anyone else feel the same or would anyone like to shout me down on this? (oh and yes I do know that job evaluation focuses on responsibilities and the role and not on personal strengths and attitudes!)
In very recent times of course we have turned to issues of maternity and paternity leave with a view to giving fathers equal rights to time off. My problem with this is that whilst I know some fathers are fantastic at sharing the childcare and domestic burden, the majority of men I know pick up this mantle far less willingly than perhaps legislation suggests they might. So, in a few years, with equal rights in this area, will we have progressed equality issues? The cynic in me says ‘no’. But again, feel free to shout me down!
So where does that leave us? Well, I have slowly been coming to the view that we might have approached this all wrong. For the most part men and women are not equal in terms of both physical and mental attributes. That is not to say that women are lesser beings of course – or that men are lesser beings! - but we tend to operate and think differently. And if you look at the shelf loads of books written on the subject, I am clearly not alone in thinking that there are some major differences between the sexes, so what equality legislation is ever going to be really able to bridge the equality gap? Or do our legislators think that if they tell us often enough we are equal we will eventually all start acting and thinking the same? (I’m sure there’s a sci fi movie in there somewhere….)
But in true Jaluch style, why not have a bit of fun and test out my theory by asking your refuse collector next time you see him (her?) if they would prefer being a dinner lady (man?)!! And at the local school canteen just ask your dinner lady if they fancy doing the refuse collecting job instead!
So what if we got rid of all our equality legislation and instead redrafted it to achieve equity (fairness) instead?
Equity legislation would actually mean a move away from primarily objective comparison to comparisons that are potentially a lot more subjective. But is this massively out of kilter with where other legislation is heading? I don’t think it particularly is. Consider an employee who says they are stressed whilst another employee does the same job and says they are not stressed. Consider an employee who raises a grievance to the effect that their manager does not adequately motivate them whilst the rest of the team are perfectly happy and fully engaged. And consider an employee who brings a sex discrimination claim because they perceive their treatment to have been unfair, whilst others shrug their shoulders at something they perceive to be irritating but not discriminatory and get on with their jobs. Employment legislation developments in recent years have permitted individuals feelings, perceptions and reasoning to be open for consideration and discussion, so equitable treatment, rather than equal treatment, might not seem like such a far reach after all.
But enough from me, what do you think?
 |
