Things that annoy you.com ,The new thread by Ad7 - HAPPY DAYS!

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by <]:^D » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:16 am

yeah women are getting so uppity about this, whats their problem lol

User avatar
ignition
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by ignition » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:19 am

In my job I have an older female colleague who is in the exact same position and role as me, we just work on different projects. She has about 10 years plus experience at this level whereas I have about 3 years.

My work is more complex, has higher influence nationally and has more responsibilities. The bracket for our grade has a range of £12k from top to bottom. I am near the bottom, and she is at the top because "experience" :x

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:24 am

ignition wrote:In my job I have an older female colleague who is in the exact same position and role as me, we just work on different projects. She has about 10 years plus experience at this level whereas I have about 3 years.

My work is more complex, has higher influence nationally and has more responsibilities. The bracket for our grade has a range of £12k from top to bottom. I am near the bottom, and she is at the top because "experience" :x


Sorry mate but people get annoyed with the hyperbolic headlines and endless 'victim' narrative, when 9/10 it's a difference in what people earn, not what they're paid. Suck it up sweetheart.

User avatar
Skarjo
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Skarjo » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:54 am

Dickheads who bring cram all their gooseberry fool into huge 'hand luggage' suitcases that are far too big for the cabin.

Just buy a proper suitcase, pay the twenty quid if necessary and put it in the strawberry floating hold.

Blue Eyes wrote:No wonder I'm eating my balls instead of sweets.

Skarjo's Scary Stories...
User avatar
Cuttooth
Emeritus
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Cuttooth » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:26 pm

Lagamorph wrote:At least in this case they're comparing the same type of jobs, unlike that Tesco bullshit one where they're claiming unequal pay despite doing totally different jobs in totally different locations.

That doesn't really make it bullshit though. The argument (from what I could gather) was based on whether the two different roles in different locations are being correctly and fairly valued by Tesco, as well as whether there's crossover in what each role entails.

The argument was that frontline supermarket staff still do a lot of physical labour on top of helping customers and handle money, and the disparity comes from a cultural acceptance that it's seen as a more 'feminine' role because the majority of staff are women.

The fight is for all staff in that role, regardless of gender, to be given the same value as warehouse staff if it's accepted the current evaluation isn't fair.

Basically if you were doing a job for a company that was paid less than another role but you felt was incorrectly undervalued, purely based on assumptions surrounding the type of work you do, what would you do about it?

User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Lagamorph » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:38 pm

Cuttooth wrote:
Lagamorph wrote:At least in this case they're comparing the same type of jobs, unlike that Tesco bullshit one where they're claiming unequal pay despite doing totally different jobs in totally different locations.

That doesn't really make it bullshit though. The argument (from what I could gather) was based on whether the two different roles in different locations are being correctly and fairly valued by Tesco, as well as whether there's crossover in what each role entails.

The argument was that frontline supermarket staff still do a lot of physical labour on top of helping customers and handle money, and the disparity comes from a cultural acceptance that it's seen as a more 'feminine' role because the majority of staff are women.

The fight is for all staff in that role, regardless of gender, to be given the same value as warehouse staff if it's accepted the current evaluation isn't fair.

Basically if you were doing a job for a company that was paid less than another role but you felt was incorrectly undervalued, purely based on assumptions surrounding the type of work you do, what would you do about it?

But on the other hand, you knew exactly how much that job was valued when you took it. And the jobs have been valued at the same for everyone doing it. The male supermarket staff are being paid exactly the same as the female staff as far as I can tell, whilst the female warehouse staff are being paid exactly the same as the male warehouse staff.
Just because one job happens to have more women than men and the other job happens to have more men than women doesn't seem to me to necessarily mean that there's any pay discrimination on the basis of gender going on. If Tesco are undervaluing their Supermarket staff then it doesn't seem to have anything to do with gender.

Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Hyperion
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Beyond the wall

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Hyperion » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:57 pm

I need to work in a job where I get more money because I have a penis. I've only worked at places with salary bands :(

Image
Ad7 wrote:stop moaning about it
User avatar
Squinty
Member
Joined in 2009
Location: Norn Oirland

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Squinty » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:01 pm

The Tescos thing, are they talking about a distributor warehouse or a shop warehouse job?

Shop warehouse was a total gift in comparison to shopfloor, but I don't think it was any better paid whenever I worked there.

User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Jenuall » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:06 pm

I think it's a good thing that more attention is being paid to the gender pay gap - pay should be fair regardless of your genitals. However much of the debate and data so far has been a bit too limited to support a truly informed argument either way. The requirement is "equal pay for equal work" but most of the data we see doesn't give enough insight into whether those instances where there is a pay gap are due to differences in the work being done or not.

ImageImage
User avatar
shadow202
Member
Joined in 2012

PostRe: RE: Re: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by shadow202 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:15 pm

Jenuall wrote:I think it's a good thing that more attention is being paid to the gender pay gap - pay should be fair regardless of your genitals. However much of the debate and data so far has been a bit too limited to support a truly informed argument either way. The requirement is "equal pay for equal work" but most of the data we see doesn't give enough insight into whether those instances where there is a pay gap are due to differences in the work being done or not.


Does equal pay for equal work stop at job role or do we need to narrow it down to the productivity of the individual and then pay them accordingly?

User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Lagamorph » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:25 pm

Hyperion wrote:I need to work in a job where I get more money because I have a penis. I've only worked at places with salary bands :(

Gigolo?

Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Jenuall
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: RE: Re: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Jenuall » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:26 pm

shadow202 wrote:
Jenuall wrote:I think it's a good thing that more attention is being paid to the gender pay gap - pay should be fair regardless of your genitals. However much of the debate and data so far has been a bit too limited to support a truly informed argument either way. The requirement is "equal pay for equal work" but most of the data we see doesn't give enough insight into whether those instances where there is a pay gap are due to differences in the work being done or not.


Does equal pay for equal work stop at job role or do we need to narrow it down to the productivity of the individual and then pay them accordingly?


Quite - it's a nice phrase that encapsulates the goal but the reality is not as simple as it sounds. How do you determine who is providing "equal" benefit?

I would suggest that you have to take into account a whole bunch of factors if you are to properly assess things: job role, seniority, responsibility, performance, efficiency, level of experience, quality of output etc.

It is a real tricky thing to investigate - but something that absolutely needs to be done.

ImageImage
User avatar
Regginator3
Member
Joined in 2011

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Regginator3 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:27 pm

the left

User avatar
Karl
Seyana!
Seyana!
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Karl » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:29 pm

:lol:

User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Moggy » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:41 pm

Regginator3 wrote:the left


Didn’t you say you voted for Labour at the last election? The Labour Party that has ultra-lefty Jeremy Corbyn as leader?

User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by <]:^D » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:45 pm

regginator has recently read the Wikipedia entry for John Locke and wants everyone to know about it :roll:

User avatar
Rax
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Raxicori

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Rax » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:16 pm

Skarjo wrote:Dickheads who bring cram all their gooseberry fool into huge 'hand luggage' suitcases that are far too big for the cabin.

Just buy a proper suitcase, pay the twenty quid if necessary and put it in the strawberry floating hold.

I read an interesting idea recently that airlines should start making checked bags free but charge people to bring a bag into the cabin, instead of the other way round. This would prevent the mad rush to be the first onto the plane to make sure you get a spot in the overhead locker and it would make getting overyone in and out of the plane quicker, easier and safer. If nothing else it would be interesting to see one of them try this and see how it would work out.

User avatar
Regginator3
Member
Joined in 2011

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Regginator3 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:17 pm

Moggy wrote:
Regginator3 wrote:the left


Didn’t you say you voted for Labour at the last election? The Labour Party that has ultra-lefty Jeremy Corbyn as leader?

I know, right? Can't believe it myself.

User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by Lagamorph » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:51 pm

Rax wrote:
Skarjo wrote:Dickheads who bring cram all their gooseberry fool into huge 'hand luggage' suitcases that are far too big for the cabin.

Just buy a proper suitcase, pay the twenty quid if necessary and put it in the strawberry floating hold.

I read an interesting idea recently that airlines should start making checked bags free but charge people to bring a bag into the cabin, instead of the other way round. This would prevent the mad rush to be the first onto the plane to make sure you get a spot in the overhead locker and it would make getting overyone in and out of the plane quicker, easier and safer. If nothing else it would be interesting to see one of them try this and see how it would work out.

Reminds me of that British Airways plane that was on fire and everyone still stopped to get their bags out of the overhead lockers.

Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
<]:^D
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: ANNOY: The new thread by Ad7
by <]:^D » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:56 pm

bit of fire isnt that bad


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DarkRula, Dowbocop, Errkal, FatDaz, Godzilla, HSH28, Kanbei, Pedz, Tineash, wensleydale and 53 guests