Gender Pay and the time I appeared on BBC Radio 4

So immediately I should caveat that the aforementioned BBC Radio 4 appearance (if you can even 'appear' on radio?) was for a few anti-climatic seconds sandwiched between, quite rightly, two highly qualified speakers: Charlotte Sweeney and the CEO of Virgin Money Jayne-Anne Gadhia, talking about the gender pay gap. I also asked to remain anonymous as I'd just returned to work after my second round of maternity leave and the childcare fees were such that I really didn't fancy getting fired. But don't let that get in the way of an important story...

Anyway, context. 

Earlier this year organisations employing over 250 employees had to publish their gender pay gap reports, detailing specific figures relating to male and female pay, and as these reports began to trickle in ahead of the April 4th deadline the situation was looking pretty bleak for those with wombs and workplace aspirations. Lucy Burton, presenter and reporter for the BBC Radio 4 Today program was on the case... behind the carefully prepared narratives (and gender balanced imagery) being supplied by big employers to accompany these reports she wanted to know if the data had sparked meaningful discussion within the workplace or whether the promise of change was mere lip service.

And in the words of my younger sister, who actually attends political marches (with homemade banners and everything) "silence is compliance"... so I responded to Lucy's inquiry. 

"Hi Lucy

I saw your call for submissions around the topic of gender pay gap reporting (GPGR) via LinkedIn.

Last week my company issued its GPGR and as expected there is a gap, which was quickly described as "better than the national average" and yes our 15% gap in mean hourly pay was not as bad as the national average of 18% - quite why this was being emphasised as a positive was unclear to me and I viewed it as a small consolation. I told my employer in an open forum that I would have liked them to be more bullish about their intention to reach zero - so far they have no targets or timeline around this and instead want to "monitor" the data set for another year.

My additional questions around the proportion of women recruited during the last year, and the proportion of internal promotions being awarded to women in the last year were not answered with figures.

A range of existing initiatives were outlined presumably to demonstrate that the company is committed to enabling the upward mobility of talented and ambitious women and ultimately "balancing the books" when it comes to the proportion of women in senior roles. The companies mentoring and training programs were referenced together with its flexible working policy and involvement with WISE and STEM.

All very nice, except when these initiatives are anchored in reality. For example, the reality of me being awarded flexible working after returning to work with my daughter was that when I asked for a pay rise I was told by my line manager "you've been given flexible working, what more do you want?" well, not postpartum career stagnation. The reality of working flexibility often involves having the words "only" or "just" prefixed to your working pattern, for example colleagues are routinely referred to as "only" part time as though their ambition, commitment and contribution to the organisation has diminished. The reality of our involvement in STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Manufacturing) activities such as inviting school children to view our production facilities is brilliant, but it left some of the audience asking "what are you doing for us right now?"

The mandatory publication of GPGR for organisations of over 250 employees is a useful requirement as it keeps the topic at the fore and requires employers to have a considered narrative around the figures and what they are doing to close the gap. The conscious and unconscious bias of management that blocks the career advancement and upward mobility of women in the workplace is trickier to address, it requires introspection and an open mind around how a senior role will work for women who may also have the role of primary family caregiver.

There is a level of resilience required to continually swim against the tide, and it is exhausting and I can understand why many women decide to no longer engage in this battle. I'm not sure that the tide is turning yet but perhaps the current may now be in our favour.

All the very best with your piece Lucy, please do let me know when it is set to air.

Julia"

Ah, the relief at even writing it down.

Lucy responded and off I toddled to the BBC Cambridge Radio studios to link up with her in London to pre-record something based on the above, we chatted for ages on this topic and it was amazing. It didn't really matter to me if my comments went to air, it was just hugely validating to hear that Lucy had heard from many other women facing similar experiences. And this was not okay.

Not being an HR professional or an official company spokesperson, and having no actual qualifications to talk about ways to close the gender pay gap at an accelerated rate, I figured I was positioned as the 'voice from the ground' so to speak. Adding balance and a dose of reality to the immaculately prepared media statements that had been flooding the press in the run up to the gender pay gap reporting deadline. I was, to all intents and purposes, part of the talent pool of tomorrow and on an upward career trajectory... but after returning to work postpartum found myself feeling devalued and disillusioned by the companies lackluster response to the most important topic of my working life. 

A much more talented university friend of mine (she owns a flat in London and everything, a marker of success if ever there was one) has reached the lofty heights of senior manager at one of the 'Big Four', amazing. And look at the commentary that accompanies their gender pay gap report:

"We continue to focus on ensuring there are no potential barriers to female progression."

They cite a whole raft of award worthy initiatives aimed at enabling flexible working and career progression. Phew, thank goodness for that. Except (you guessed it) the experience on the ground is somewhat different to the boardroom. My very awesome friends says:

"Within a month of working for ['BIG FOUR' COMPANY] I was told that if I wanted a family then this wasn't the career for me. And my team (all men) just sat there and said nothing."

Okay, that doesn't look great. Someone send these guy the memo on gender bias. Maybe another great friend of mine who works for a big retailer has had a different experience. This retailer also achieved 1st place in the 2017 'FTSE100 for women on boards and in leadership' wowee. My buddy says:

"A colleague of mine who was a buyer came back after maternity leave and she was told that if she wanted to work part-time she could work in the restaurant. She didn't come back."

So it is the boardroom or the staff canteen people...

I worry for those of us in the middle, who decide to procreate (as far as I'm aware this superpower is only bestowed upon women), want to spend a portion of their week being a hands on parent (or indeed carer, or side hustler), and the other bringing value and awesomeness to the workplace - typically underpinned with years of hard earned experience and tens of thousands of pounds of education. It can't be the canteen or nothing? Can it?*

*Just to clarify that I love a good company canteen and all those who work within it.

And this bias pervades a job search too. In the main my recent experience of exploring and securing a new opportunity was positive. For most recruiters and their clients, statements around work life balance, flexible working and so on featured fairly heavily and positively on their website and job listings. Senior roles by default were however predominantly listed as full time. Of course then actually negotiating flexible working at the point of accepting an offer can be a situation requiring a cool head, but at least in my case I held my value firmly, securing a meaty marketing management position and retaining an 80% work week. Hurrah. This is despite a very sharp intake of breath from one recruiter, followed by "Oh" when I said that maintaining an 80% working week was non-negotiable. And another recruiter, bless them they were trying to help, who thought that the ability to work from home would lure me into a 100% working week. Perhaps the toddler and the baby could run feral on that day?

So, to the end of the story... well there isn't one yet is there? As a marketer I was slightly self-conscious about writing and sharing an article that wouldn't have snappy actionable bullet points, jazzy accompanying graphics or a neat, zippy ending. But 9 months on from the GPGR deadline, and despite good news stories appearing every time a female CEO is appointed, the reality from the ground continues to trickle through... and if silence is compliance then I (at least) wanted to continue the conversation.

Oh, and if you'd like to listen to my 30 seconds (if that) of fame (anonymity) then you can catch the news item at the bottom here, the other contributors are really very good and it makes for a lively 15 minute discussion. 

I'd love to hear your experiences of the above. Is your company large enough to publish its data? Are meaningful plans in place to close the gap? Does gender bias (toward either women or men) still pervade your company culture? What can be done on a personal and practical level to help close the gap sooner?