Equal Pay Day: what is the answer?

We're all agreed: people ought to earn the same regardless of gender; women and men should be paid the same for doing the same job; and overall there should be just as many women in high-paying jobs as there are men. Unfortunately, despite all this agreement, women are still paid far less than men. The question is, what can be done about it?

Yesterday was Equal Pay Day, which marks the day every year when women start working for free. The idea is to work out what the average man makes each day, then allocate the same amount of money from a woman's annual salary to each day, and see how long it lasts. Each year the money only gets women to early November.

This year the gap is smaller than ever before. Minister for Women and Equalities, Nicky Morgan, celebrated by declaring: "This one nation government is committed to eradicating gender inequality in the workplace. And Equal Pay Day is an important reminder of how far we have come, with the gender pay gap now the lowest on record and more women on FTSE 250 boards than ever before."
%VIRTUAL-ArticleSidebar-jobs-guide%
The government

However, she added: "It also reminds us of the progress still to be made. We've made great strides but we won't stop until we've consigned the gender pay gap to the history books and pushed through those barriers which prevent women fulfilling their potential."

The question is why Morgan believes she has the power to do this. Legislation has been a key weapon in the fight for equal pay. The trouble is that legislation for equal pay has been in place for 45 years. Two people doing the same job at the same skill level for the same employer regardless of gender should already be paid the same wage.

In the years since this legislation was first introduced, there have been all sorts of laws put through to try to close the gap. There have been several acts promoting maternity rights, the minimum wage, and discrimination laws. There was the right to allow parents to share parental leave (brought in this year), plus schemes encouraging employers to assess pay by gender, and setting targets for the number of women on the boards of FTSE 100 companies.

And yet the pay gap endures. There's an argument therefore, that we can't close the gap completely with legislation.

Why does the gap endure?

It pays therefore, to look at where the gap itself comes from. It's not fundamentally in place from the outset. Among law firms, for example, on average 57.1% of trainees are women - and outside London this increases to 64.5%.

The problem doesn't seem to be one of lack of promotion in the early days either. A study back in August showed that between the ages of 22 and 29 women typically earn £1,111 more a year than their male counterpart. Among law firms, women make up 57.2% of associates.

When they get to their 30 (the child-rearing years), however, this all changes, and men are bringing in far more than women. The issue seems, therefore, to be down to women taking time off, or changing their role to accommodate their family. Their career is no longer their primary focus, and their earning potential suffers as a result. Assuming children live at home for 18 years, that's almost half of most women's working lives where they are juggling work and caring responsibilities.

Who is to blame?

The question of blame gets very muddled after this point. There are those who blame biology, and argue that as only women can have children, they are the natural carers, and as a result their child needs them at home in the early years - and their support throughout their childhood. The fact that women are paid less and promoted less from this point onwards is a direct result of their decision to start a family, so the blame is effectively entirely theirs.

Other people blame society, for believing it is a woman's role to take care of the child, rather than something to be shared between parents, and cultural biases that make it difficult for a man to choose a caring role. These pressures mean it is still more likely for women to be the primary carer.

On the other hand, there are those who blame the government, who have done nothing to make childcare affordable enough to enable both parents to continue their careers meaningfully, and forces one into becoming the primary carer - at the expense of her career.

Others believe the fault lies with the workplace for failing to ensure there is a solid career path for mothers, that keeps them on a promotional and earnings track and properly prepares them for more senior jobs once caring responsibilities absorb less of their focus.

While others blame the middle class, middle aged men at the top, for making assumptions about mothers and their priorities - and pushing them onto the mummy track despite their devotion to work.

Of course, who you blame will dictate where you believe the solution lies. It's why despite all the agreement that the pay gap is wrong, there's very little agreement over how we solve the problem. Do we need dramatic cultural change, new rights for working mothers, or better childcare to help close the gap?

What do you think? Let us know in the comments.