Comments on: No gender pay audits, say Women and Work Commission

By: Des Clarke

Des Clarke — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 17:11:58 +0000

Antonia, I must confess to a lack of awareness of pay audits in this context and to any possible benefits they could bring.
Whilst I think there is still some way to go in reaching working class youngsters with the potential to enter HE but who do not consider it an option, I do feel that continuous expansion of full time, post 18 HE is unwise. There are alternatives such as work based vocational degrees whereby students can gain degree level qualifications and be in employment. The organisation I work for is involved with a project called Aim Higher that focuses on reaching youngsters that normally may not consider HE and encourages them to think of it both in university and work based settings.
I feel uneasy about aspects of the recent expansion of HE. I am encountering an increasing number of recent graduates that are settling for jobs that they could have got after “A” levels - except now they are saddled with a lot of debt. They do seem disillusioned. I do also question whether there is a simple equation between producing graduates and generating economic growth. Before Xmas I heard an academic on the radio saying that Georgia has the highest percentage of graduates in Europe. It does not appear to be doing them much good.

By: Antonia

Antonia — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:38:12 +0000

Des - I agreed with everything you said until the final sentence, although I’m not convinced that ending gender stereotyping alone will remove the pay gap - we still need to root out discrimination, and the way to do that is by gender pay audits.

As for getting rid of the 50% target, we disagree. University is a life-changing experience (well it was for me). Getting rid of the target removes the pressure to increase access for working class kids, and I fail to see how that helps us move towards becoming a high-wage high-skill economy.

By: Des Clarke

Des Clarke — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:57:21 +0000

This really is a complex area. The issue of moving many female workers out of the ghetto of the 5 “c”’s is a valid one. However, we cannot overlook the practical and economic reasons why large numbers of women are in these vocations.
If you are a mother that has taken a break from paid employment to raise pre school children, you will probably reach the point when you wish to return to paid employment, and in many (probably most) cases this will be part time employment. Jobs within areas like care, catering, clerical retail etc. are not only readily available, but the part time nature of a lot of the vacancies suits the needs of women returners i.e. having to balance working hours with child care responsibilities. This is compounded by the fact that 75% of UK businesses are micro or small to medium sized enterprises that value the flexibility that enploying part time staff offers.
The issue of non traditional occupations is particularly annoying. If you look at skill shortage areas such as engineering, construction and (of course!) plumbing, you are looking at sectors where women make up only 1 to 1.5% of the workforce.In the case of plumbing, this can be an ideal occupation for a working mother because most plumbers are self employed and can consequently (to a degree) flex their working hours to balance other needs.
Unfortunately, not only is plumbing not percieved as a female role, there is also a dearth of training provision in this and other skill shortage areas.

I believe that what we need is greater efforts within the education system to combat gender stereotyping in relation to jobs/careers,combined with an action plan in collaboration with employers. Furthermore, we also need to invest more in vocational training and get rid of this arbitary, damaging target of shoe horning 50% of young people into Higher Education by 2010.