SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002   11,000+ members   72,000+ posts

Home | SE23 Topics | Businesses & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | About SE23.com | Advertising | Contact | |
 Armstrong & Co Solicitors



Post Reply  Post Topic 
Statistical stupidity
Author Message
Dotcom


Posts: 39
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #1
17-12-2007 02:21 PM

Ooperlooper wrote:
From page 5 of the December issue of Southwark Life (the magazine from Southwark Council):

Quote:
Southwark's independent equality and diversity panel brings together representatives of different faiths, sexual orientation, cultures and ages to try to ensure that no one is excluded or misunderstood. While this helps to reduce discrimination, there is still room to improve.

A pay gap between men and women persists 30 years after the Equal Pay Act, with women nationally earning 17% less than men, 42% less if you work part time. The situation is improving though. The proportion of female council staff in the top 5% of earners has increased to 40.37% in 2006/7 from 38.89% the year before.


Twaddle!

Of course the average woman earns less than the average man. Women tend to take something like 10-20 years off to raise kids and then retire 5 years earlier. The average woman works for perhaps 30 years in their lifetime, while the average man works for more like 45 years.

Considering that earnings generally increase with experience, it's hardly surprising if the average man earns 17% more than the average woman, or a higher proportion of highly paid jobs go to men, is it?

Surely the Equal Pay Act is all about paying men and women with equivalent skills, experience and performance equally for any given job, not paying the average woman the same as the average man.

Nice one Southwark!


More rantings from OL.

Women take 10 to 20 years off to raise kids - I wish, although I do happen to believe in choice. If a woman can afford to stay at home and raise her kids by herself, good luck to her I say.

And then retire 5 years earlier - not any more - read up on it.

However, your final paragraph is quite right. Authorities are duty bound to conduct a job evaluation exercise to ensure people are being paid the correct grade for the work they do. This would have been undertaken in response to the new equality legislation (the Equal Pay Act) to rule out sex discrimination by employers.

Twaddle?

Statistical stupidity?

I'll say.

Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Messages In This Topic
Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 15-12-2007, 05:18 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - roz - 15-12-2007, 09:05 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - shzl400 - 15-12-2007, 10:13 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 16-12-2007, 12:39 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 17-12-2007, 11:46 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 16-12-2007, 01:18 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - shzl400 - 16-12-2007, 02:25 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - shzl400 - 17-12-2007, 12:06 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Dotcom - 17-12-2007 02:21 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 17-12-2007, 02:50 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Dotcom - 17-12-2007, 03:25 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 17-12-2007, 08:41 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 17-12-2007, 10:36 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 18-12-2007, 10:59 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 17-12-2007, 11:05 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 18-12-2007, 12:14 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - roz - 18-12-2007, 10:54 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - baggydave - 19-12-2007, 12:06 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 19-12-2007, 11:32 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 19-12-2007, 12:30 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 19-12-2007, 12:42 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - shzl400 - 19-12-2007, 10:31 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 19-12-2007, 11:26 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - shzl400 - 19-12-2007, 12:49 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Jane - 19-12-2007, 02:10 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 19-12-2007, 02:37 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 19-12-2007, 02:38 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 19-12-2007, 02:44 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 19-12-2007, 02:49 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Elizabeth25 - 19-12-2007, 03:54 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 19-12-2007, 03:59 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Elizabeth25 - 19-12-2007, 04:05 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Elizabeth25 - 19-12-2007, 03:58 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 19-12-2007, 04:24 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Elizabeth25 - 19-12-2007, 04:03 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 19-12-2007, 04:06 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Elizabeth25 - 19-12-2007, 04:24 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 19-12-2007, 04:15 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 19-12-2007, 04:33 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Jane - 19-12-2007, 07:09 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - hilltopgeneral - 19-12-2007, 07:39 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - roz - 19-12-2007, 07:51 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - nevermodern - 20-12-2007, 01:04 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Jane - 20-12-2007, 11:15 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - baggydave - 24-12-2007, 01:36 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Baboonery - 24-12-2007, 01:30 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - shzl400 - 24-12-2007, 01:54 PM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 25-12-2007, 02:23 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 25-12-2007, 10:52 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - roz - 25-12-2007, 11:24 AM
RE: Statistical stupidity - Ooperlooper - 26-12-2007, 11:10 PM