An edited version of this was published in yesterdays Independent on Sunday
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/equal-pay-evening-up-salaries-would-also-benefit-men-who-are-under-pressure-to-work-longer-hours-10399092.html
Prepare your daughter for working life. Give her less pocket money than your son. This slogan appeared on an Equal Opportunities Commission campaign poster 15 years ago. I keep it on my fridge to remind my son of his gender induced entitlement.
David Cameron’s announcement this week to make companies with over 250 employees publish their pay audits is welcome, if a tad tardy. Paying women less than their male counterparts for a job of equal value has been illegal since the 70’s but that hasn’t deterred the pernicious practice. In 2012, Birmingham council was ordered to pay over £700m to 170 women, including cleaners and carers, for depriving them of bonuses which were awarded to employees in traditionally male jobs.
In 2005 women earned 18% less than men. In 2015, the gap has widened to 20%, which can reach 40% at senior levels when bonuses are included. The impact of the pay gap on women is well documented. It is particularly marked when women become mothers. Decisions about which parent stays at home are usually driven by pay so it’s no surprise that it is predominately women who relinquish their jobs.
However, the far reaching societal consequences of the pay gap largely go unreported. It creates a vicious circle whereby men, as primary bread winner, are under increased pressure to work ever longer hours in order to ingratiate themselves with the boss. Companies exploit this vulnerability. There is a myth, propagated by employers, that men eschew flexible working practices because they love the cut and thrust of long hours. Whilst this is true of a minority, for the vast majority it is not.
When I carried out research on the long hours culture, I asked men who had small children why they didn’t request flexible working arrangements (having children is no longer a requirement). All of them responded that it would be career limiting. One said he took a promotion to compensate for the loss of his [more qualified but less paid] wife’s income. He was promised his travel would only increase by 10%. It increased by 70%. He was struggling to cope with being an absentee dad and his wife was drowning as a lone mum. He was actively looking for a job elsewhere.
On a couple of occasions, whilst advising some of the UK’s largest organisations on discrimination and ethics, I came across coded data I wasn’t supposed to see. There were secret budgets ring fenced for litigation in relation to discrimination. In amongst stats breaking down staff attrition along gender lines, I came across a column marked “deaths”. In one of the organisations there were 6 in the past 12 months. All of whom were men.
I was told the information was “classified” but gleaned that it related to deaths suspected to be work related. In one global corporation an executive had committed suicide while on assignment overseas. Apparently he got extremely stressed before making presentations. Rather than ease up, his manager forced him to “man up”. Unable to cope with the stress, away from his family, the night before a presentation he threw himself off his hotel balcony.
Elsewhere an executive who worked notoriously long hours dropped dead of a heart attack one night. He was in his 30’s. The corporations’ response? Invest in an onsite gym for employees to “de-stress”. It was spun by HR as a fitness issue, completely unrelated to his being pushed by his employer to breaking point. As I was informed by one HR professional, “Our job is to optimise employee productivity, not to babysit”. In my experience though, people are far more productive when they’re alive.
The lack of women and minorities on boards was identified as a factor in the global recession, which could have been avoided had we listened to similar warnings issued in the Higgs report (commissioned, post Enron, to improve Britain’s corporate governance) in 2005. Higgs found that a few men held multiple board positions and that many were appointed by a tap on the shoulder rather than competing in an open and fair selection process. Isn’t that positive discrimination? Yes, but as long as the beneficiary is not female or black, we don’t call it that.
Homogeneity leads to group think, which in turn leads to bad decisions. Pay transparency (with corresponding sanctions) will help break the vicious circle of inequality by encouraging women to return to work after child birth, for example, and to participate at leadership level. This would mitigate against the long hours culture, which, despite being bad for productivity and societal wellbeing, prevails in a climate of masculinity.
It is detrimental to society and the economy to reduce fatherhood to a walk on part whilst at the same time driving women out of the workforce when they become mothers. Children need fathers as well as mothers and UK plc needs women, as well as men, at the helm.
Monday 20 July 2015
Sunday 12 July 2015
If You’re Not Angry Right Now, You’re Either Very Rich Or In A Coma.
This weeks’ budget unveiled a naked, brutal assault on the most vulnerable in society. Our poorest children and young people.
According to Nelson Mandela, “There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children”.
George Osborne’s budget oozes contempt for children audacious enough to be born into poverty. Rather than throw them a lifeline to break the cycle of disadvantage, he kicked the escape ladder from under their feet. Knowing what it feels like to live from hand to mouth should be a prerequisite for the job of Chancellor of the Exchequer.
What differentiates human beings from animals is our ability to empathise. Without it, we can’t access compassion and a sense of fairness and justice. Without ever experiencing hardship, it’s difficult (though not impossible, see Tony Benn) to comprehend that poverty is not a life choice. That many people, through no fault of their own, or sheer bad luck, end up in crisis. Many work hard to escape the cycle but find the odds stacked so high against them that they become paralyzed by hopelessness and despair.
According to the institute for fiscal studies, the budget will leave the poorest 10% of families around £800 a year worse off with the next 10% seeing their income slashed by £1,100 annually. Child poverty is expected to soar in the coming years due to relentless welfare cuts. George Osborne also abolished grants for the poorest to go to university and with them any hope of a better future.
Meanwhile the richest 10% will see their family’s income reduced by just £350 a year while inheritance and corporation tax is also reduced. This week Kevin Farnsworth, a researcher from York university, revealed that, at the same time as the government is making 12bn in welfare cuts, taxpayers are handing businesses £93bn a year in hidden subsidies (this doesn’t include legacy costs of bank bailouts for 2008-09 and other crisis measures, which are estimated to have cost £35bn in 2012-13). That’s more than £3,500 from each household in the UK. You don’t have to be Carol Vorderman to do the maths.
I can’t help but see alarming resonances between today’s austerity Britain and the austere Victorian era so evocatively chronicled in Charles Dickens’ “Hard Times”.
I read the book at a time of prolonged recession in Ireland, which didn’t end until the 90’s. I discovered a hook upon which I could hang and articulate all the observations I’d accumulated, through the prism of a working class child. How society is structured, the divide between the classes, how the haves gain at the have nots’ expense. The unfairness and inequality, the powerlessness in the face of the enormous state machine constructed in such a way as to grind you down and spit you out when you become a burden (old, disabled, poor). The way espoused ideology of governments indoctrinate children, through educational constraint (“fact” not corrupting “fancy”), social segregation (private boarding schools) and a cycle of disadvantage and poverty (welfare cuts to the poor and subsidies to the rich).
My father, a self employed builder, would take myself and my three siblings with him on Saturdays in the hope that seeing he had little mouths to feed might shame business owners into paying him the wages he was owed. Some left him for months without paying, others never paid at all, but there was nothing he could do. He had no recourse to justice. Even as a child, I remember feeling incredibly proud of my father’s dignified integrity but at the same time furious at the bosses who claimed not to have the means to pay, while standing next to their brand new Mercedes.
In contemporary Britain, the big bosses plead unfairness at having to pay their fair share, threatening to take their business elsewhere at the first sign of a brown envelope marked HMRC. The Mercedes’ have been replaced by private jets and tax free houses in Belgravia Square.
If my parents’ fate befell me in today’s austerity Britain (or Ireland), working 2 jobs, as they did, would not be enough to shield my child from the indignity of a food bank. During the lean years, clothes were sourced in charity shops (before it was cool) and the hand me down system worked for my elder sister (but not so much for my younger siblings). But, we were never cold or hungry.
The rampant deregulation of industry over the years is crippling society and driving, even those in employment, into poverty. Between 2002 and 2011, energy bills rose by 44 percent and water by 21 percent, while incomes of poorer households fell 11 percent over the same period.
A Report published this week by the Competition and Marketing Authority (CMA) revealed that 70% of customers and 14% of small businesses are being overcharged by the big 6 energy companies. This is not breaking news and the espoused solution is a red herring.
Urging people to switch providers is not the answer. Dealing with the root cause, wanton exploitative practices by the big 6 is the only sustainable solution. It is unacceptable to shift the burden onto the individual customer to change provider every time energy companies move the goal posts. Just like the banks, no sooner have you switched provider to get a better rate, than the rate changes and you’re back to square one.
Meanwhile, with the eyes of the world diverted to Greece this week, the European Parliament dealt democracy a crushing blow. TTIP (see earlier blog) is stolen, like a thief in the night, ever closer into our midst. But hey, at least we can seek solace in some quality TV. I’m off to watch one of the “Benefits Britain” spin offs. Tonight, it’s “Too fat to work” (for the benefit of my overseas readers, this programme exists. I'm not making it up). I'm looking forward to the day when Channel 5 commissions a series entitled, "Too rich to pay taxes". I won't hold my breath.
*I’ve been commissioned to examine the rights (or lack thereof) of children in Britain. It’s a medium term project, which will be published in a couple of months. If you have any personal experiences or stories (relating to education, health, including mental health, access to justice etc) do get in touch. You can contact me directly through my website.
According to Nelson Mandela, “There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children”.
George Osborne’s budget oozes contempt for children audacious enough to be born into poverty. Rather than throw them a lifeline to break the cycle of disadvantage, he kicked the escape ladder from under their feet. Knowing what it feels like to live from hand to mouth should be a prerequisite for the job of Chancellor of the Exchequer.
What differentiates human beings from animals is our ability to empathise. Without it, we can’t access compassion and a sense of fairness and justice. Without ever experiencing hardship, it’s difficult (though not impossible, see Tony Benn) to comprehend that poverty is not a life choice. That many people, through no fault of their own, or sheer bad luck, end up in crisis. Many work hard to escape the cycle but find the odds stacked so high against them that they become paralyzed by hopelessness and despair.
According to the institute for fiscal studies, the budget will leave the poorest 10% of families around £800 a year worse off with the next 10% seeing their income slashed by £1,100 annually. Child poverty is expected to soar in the coming years due to relentless welfare cuts. George Osborne also abolished grants for the poorest to go to university and with them any hope of a better future.
Meanwhile the richest 10% will see their family’s income reduced by just £350 a year while inheritance and corporation tax is also reduced. This week Kevin Farnsworth, a researcher from York university, revealed that, at the same time as the government is making 12bn in welfare cuts, taxpayers are handing businesses £93bn a year in hidden subsidies (this doesn’t include legacy costs of bank bailouts for 2008-09 and other crisis measures, which are estimated to have cost £35bn in 2012-13). That’s more than £3,500 from each household in the UK. You don’t have to be Carol Vorderman to do the maths.
I can’t help but see alarming resonances between today’s austerity Britain and the austere Victorian era so evocatively chronicled in Charles Dickens’ “Hard Times”.
I read the book at a time of prolonged recession in Ireland, which didn’t end until the 90’s. I discovered a hook upon which I could hang and articulate all the observations I’d accumulated, through the prism of a working class child. How society is structured, the divide between the classes, how the haves gain at the have nots’ expense. The unfairness and inequality, the powerlessness in the face of the enormous state machine constructed in such a way as to grind you down and spit you out when you become a burden (old, disabled, poor). The way espoused ideology of governments indoctrinate children, through educational constraint (“fact” not corrupting “fancy”), social segregation (private boarding schools) and a cycle of disadvantage and poverty (welfare cuts to the poor and subsidies to the rich).
My father, a self employed builder, would take myself and my three siblings with him on Saturdays in the hope that seeing he had little mouths to feed might shame business owners into paying him the wages he was owed. Some left him for months without paying, others never paid at all, but there was nothing he could do. He had no recourse to justice. Even as a child, I remember feeling incredibly proud of my father’s dignified integrity but at the same time furious at the bosses who claimed not to have the means to pay, while standing next to their brand new Mercedes.
In contemporary Britain, the big bosses plead unfairness at having to pay their fair share, threatening to take their business elsewhere at the first sign of a brown envelope marked HMRC. The Mercedes’ have been replaced by private jets and tax free houses in Belgravia Square.
If my parents’ fate befell me in today’s austerity Britain (or Ireland), working 2 jobs, as they did, would not be enough to shield my child from the indignity of a food bank. During the lean years, clothes were sourced in charity shops (before it was cool) and the hand me down system worked for my elder sister (but not so much for my younger siblings). But, we were never cold or hungry.
The rampant deregulation of industry over the years is crippling society and driving, even those in employment, into poverty. Between 2002 and 2011, energy bills rose by 44 percent and water by 21 percent, while incomes of poorer households fell 11 percent over the same period.
A Report published this week by the Competition and Marketing Authority (CMA) revealed that 70% of customers and 14% of small businesses are being overcharged by the big 6 energy companies. This is not breaking news and the espoused solution is a red herring.
Urging people to switch providers is not the answer. Dealing with the root cause, wanton exploitative practices by the big 6 is the only sustainable solution. It is unacceptable to shift the burden onto the individual customer to change provider every time energy companies move the goal posts. Just like the banks, no sooner have you switched provider to get a better rate, than the rate changes and you’re back to square one.
Meanwhile, with the eyes of the world diverted to Greece this week, the European Parliament dealt democracy a crushing blow. TTIP (see earlier blog) is stolen, like a thief in the night, ever closer into our midst. But hey, at least we can seek solace in some quality TV. I’m off to watch one of the “Benefits Britain” spin offs. Tonight, it’s “Too fat to work” (for the benefit of my overseas readers, this programme exists. I'm not making it up). I'm looking forward to the day when Channel 5 commissions a series entitled, "Too rich to pay taxes". I won't hold my breath.
*I’ve been commissioned to examine the rights (or lack thereof) of children in Britain. It’s a medium term project, which will be published in a couple of months. If you have any personal experiences or stories (relating to education, health, including mental health, access to justice etc) do get in touch. You can contact me directly through my website.
Wednesday 1 July 2015
Terrorist Attacks & Child Poverty Are On The Rise
Last Thursday, 164 people were slaughtered in Syria by terrorists who call themselves IS. I just call them terrorists. The next day, the same terrorist group allegedly carried out three further attacks, massacring 38 people on a beach in Tunisia, 27 people praying at a Mosque in Kuwait as well as carrying out an execution in Lyon.
All of these innocent lives are of equal worth and their loss will not be diminished for being borne by brown or white skin. Grief does not discriminate on grounds of nationality, nor should the media.
Despite the Syrian attack having the highest death toll (by far) and being carried out, allegedly, by the same terrorist group, it was not deemed as newsworthy as the other three atrocities. This is no doubt partly attributable to the media’s predilection for focusing on the “British dead” but it’s also more than that. I suspect the sidelining of the Syrian massacre is also about making sure we don’t start joining up embarrassing dots.
The international community’s failure in the region has led to an escalation in civilian attacks, which in turn is creating a humanitarian crisis with refugees fleeing in droves, many of whom end up in Calais, prepared to risk life and limb to give their families some hope of a future. Who wouldn’t do the same in their position?
According to the UN, the world is facing the largest number of displaced persons in modern times, with nearly 4 million fleeing the crisis in Syria alone. Whilst the EU could reportedly comfortably absorb 1 million of these refugees, its’ leaders will only agree to provide safe havens for a mere 60,000 beleaguered souls. Britain’s expressed priority is the destruction of human smugglers’ boats rather than rescuing their discarded victims.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, child poverty is thriving under the Tories. Plans to cut tax credits, which go to the poorest children in society to buy food, shoes and pay for bus fares, will plunge 300,000 more children into poverty.
But the Tories are not ashamed. Two in three children in poverty have at least one parent in work. Rather than tackle the scourge of child poverty by providing a living wage so that families (even those with work) don’t have to resort to food banks, this government’s solution is to repeal the 2010 Child Poverty Act, so that children’s welfare can be legislated away. Forget about eradicating child poverty by 2020. Eradicate the embarrassing target instead.
This week, four UK children's commissioners have joined forces to urge the Government to halt its savage benefit cuts to prevent more young people being pushed into poverty.
The commissioners for Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland sent a joint report to the United Nations, expressing concerns at the impact on children of the Government's plans to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British bill of rights.
"The HRA has been vital in promoting and protecting the rights of children in the United Kingdom and the European Court of Human Rights has had an important role in developing the protection offered to children by the ECHR," it said.
The report criticises ministers for ignoring the UK supreme court when it found the “benefit cap” – the £25,000 limit on welfare that disproportionately affects families with children, to be in breach of Article 3 of the convention. There are now 4.1m children living in absolute poverty – 500,000 more than there were when David Cameron came to power.
The commissioners said the Government's "austerity" policies had resulted in "a failure to protect the most disadvantaged children and those in especially vulnerable groups from child poverty".
The commissioners also highlighted concerns over failures to tackle child abuse, the treatment of young people in the criminal justice system and the provision of mental health services for children and young people which they said were "vastly under funded".
With a further £12bn in welfare cuts due to be announced next week, the future for our most vulnerable children does not look bright.
All of these innocent lives are of equal worth and their loss will not be diminished for being borne by brown or white skin. Grief does not discriminate on grounds of nationality, nor should the media.
Despite the Syrian attack having the highest death toll (by far) and being carried out, allegedly, by the same terrorist group, it was not deemed as newsworthy as the other three atrocities. This is no doubt partly attributable to the media’s predilection for focusing on the “British dead” but it’s also more than that. I suspect the sidelining of the Syrian massacre is also about making sure we don’t start joining up embarrassing dots.
The international community’s failure in the region has led to an escalation in civilian attacks, which in turn is creating a humanitarian crisis with refugees fleeing in droves, many of whom end up in Calais, prepared to risk life and limb to give their families some hope of a future. Who wouldn’t do the same in their position?
According to the UN, the world is facing the largest number of displaced persons in modern times, with nearly 4 million fleeing the crisis in Syria alone. Whilst the EU could reportedly comfortably absorb 1 million of these refugees, its’ leaders will only agree to provide safe havens for a mere 60,000 beleaguered souls. Britain’s expressed priority is the destruction of human smugglers’ boats rather than rescuing their discarded victims.
Meanwhile, here in the UK, child poverty is thriving under the Tories. Plans to cut tax credits, which go to the poorest children in society to buy food, shoes and pay for bus fares, will plunge 300,000 more children into poverty.
But the Tories are not ashamed. Two in three children in poverty have at least one parent in work. Rather than tackle the scourge of child poverty by providing a living wage so that families (even those with work) don’t have to resort to food banks, this government’s solution is to repeal the 2010 Child Poverty Act, so that children’s welfare can be legislated away. Forget about eradicating child poverty by 2020. Eradicate the embarrassing target instead.
This week, four UK children's commissioners have joined forces to urge the Government to halt its savage benefit cuts to prevent more young people being pushed into poverty.
The commissioners for Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland sent a joint report to the United Nations, expressing concerns at the impact on children of the Government's plans to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British bill of rights.
"The HRA has been vital in promoting and protecting the rights of children in the United Kingdom and the European Court of Human Rights has had an important role in developing the protection offered to children by the ECHR," it said.
The report criticises ministers for ignoring the UK supreme court when it found the “benefit cap” – the £25,000 limit on welfare that disproportionately affects families with children, to be in breach of Article 3 of the convention. There are now 4.1m children living in absolute poverty – 500,000 more than there were when David Cameron came to power.
The commissioners said the Government's "austerity" policies had resulted in "a failure to protect the most disadvantaged children and those in especially vulnerable groups from child poverty".
The commissioners also highlighted concerns over failures to tackle child abuse, the treatment of young people in the criminal justice system and the provision of mental health services for children and young people which they said were "vastly under funded".
With a further £12bn in welfare cuts due to be announced next week, the future for our most vulnerable children does not look bright.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)