“Having delved into this more than was probably warranted, I am more convinced than ever that everyone got this wrong”
Not everyone Ani. And not Boris. Cos Boris is observant and has never seen a job where a woman is paid less than a man. Ergo no pay inequity. qed.
I do like your honesty Ani, even when you seem forced to challenge what might be considered ‘typical feminist views’. This was another good read and reinforced my decision to sign up fully to your thread.
ATC roles require a higher degree of intelligence than social work. That’s what they’re being paid for. Same as pilots vs bus drivers. And the same as nurses vs police. Being a cop ain’t intellectually challenging for most of them, trust me on this.
The bigger picture here is how society values (or rather undervalues) certain roles. Compare care givers to advertising or real estate. The latter paid way more simply because they produce more ‘wealth’ as per our narrow minded view of value.
But it ain’t a male v female thing and the lefties are idiots for pushing that argument.
A perfect example of pay not reflecting value are Ambulance staff (50/50 male/female). Challenging role, requires brains, often risky, often dealing with shitheads, poor hours etc and doing God’s work. Like nurses, way undervalued. And meanwhile we pay cultural advisers across the motu big salaries for, well, pretty much for no return.
Thanks Boris :) yeah I was on a bit of a rollercoaster with my thinking on this one. It is perfectly reasonable for us to value jobs differently and it is essential for incentivising more complex or dangerous work. I worry some people just want every job to be paid the same. Systems that do that tend not to work out well at all.
Good for you Angela! But sorry, I never give out my number on a first date.
No disrespect intended, but I think it would be a safe bet to say the average intelligence of ATC Controllers would be slightly higher than that of social workers. Nobody is saying that social workers are not valued, nor that the work is not important, but then so is collecting the rubbish (where men are paid less than gynaecologists, just saying).
'peer reviewed academic articles'? What are those?
I can't even say my evidence is anecdotal for in truth I have not met many social workers. I've had a bit to do with Air Traffic Controllers though so I relied on that experience and a sweeping stereotype of the Social Worker genus, made my comparison and voila, came up with a most excellent theory. I'd still put money down that you and your big brain are a statistical outlier. Pleased to acknowledge however that you have slightly dented my preconceived notion of said vocation, so thanks for that.
Are the levels of qualifications necessary,add value or even contribute to how a job is done. I question whether a 4 year degree is needed for social work or a 5 year degree for being a librarian...in my profession a 4 year degree was required...learnt more on the job in relation to what was required than at university which really just let me indulge my love of learning ....hence be careful if letting the years of study required to enter a profession be your guide.
Yes. I am quite sceptical of how much emphasis we place on university degrees nowadays rather than job specific training and apprenticeship-style training. There are many professions that I think probably don't need to require the expense and length of a full degree when on the job training would be actually more practical.
Your article makes interesting reading - thanks. One thing your article doesn't cover is the need for ongoing education - as a retired nurse, I look back on a career in which there were only a few years when I wasn't both working and studying - a necessity to keep abreast of research and maintain career credibility. No senior role in nursing requires less than a masters these days. The significant element that formal education introduces is the ability to apply critical thinking to any situation. I have witnessed instances where people with less education have made "commonsense" decisions which have had undesirable outcomes. I am aware that the public generally don't appreciate the depth and breadth of nursing knowledge and practice and I am sure the same applies to many other occupations. That, of course, is reflected in the mp's and public's current questioning of the comparisons between occupations.
Having a family member with severe health issues I am very appreciative of nurses. I think people are unaware of how much of the hospital care is done by nurses while the doctors show up for rounds twice a day.
I imagine that the ongoing training is needed for keeping up to date with new technology and knowledge, but I'm interested to know if you think that nurses are being burdened with two much expectation for higher education eg as you say many need to get a Masters these days.
Yes, the ongoing study can be hard when you have other life commitments. But then I was intent on making a career - others might have different expectations/experiences. Study can be drudgery if you cannot see how it connects to your work, but it can be transformative if you make that connection. Advanced studies also enable you to pursue topics which are of particular interest to you - for me these included such as ethics, sociology and research papers. Other nurses might hone in on clinical subjects such as pharmacology, etc. Those choices depend on the area of health in which you work.
My manly technique to get better pay has been to shift jobs twice when underpaid and to exit an entire profession. Pay equity has just been a Trojan horse to get certain professions better pay, and it seems unfair that farm workers etc haven’t had this mechanism available. I prefer the old fashioned techniques of strikes and worker mobility working their “magic” rather than having some arrogant judges use their overrated intellect to come to some “well argued, finely modulated” but ultimately arbitrary (and often unaffordable) decision.
Yes that is why I point out that the biggest factor in nurses pay increasing in NZ was the 2023 agreement. The police union needs to look at how the nurses' union achieved that.
The obvious reason that the nurses did well was that they had a lot of public support and giving them a good wage increase benefited the then-govt in an election year. I think the current govt offered police a nil-increase, because they could get away with it, but if there's more attrition of police to Oz and a failure to recruit, then the new govt will increase police pay in the coming election year.
It is a very complex subject. I wonder if the explanation for some of the industry related differences is simply how many people want to work in the job? There is also the matter of how intrinsically rewarding each type of work might be.
Great research into job requirements and pay, but it's a moot point as job pay is typically based on supply and demand. I personally know multiple people who work in fields like teaching or social work purely out of passion rather than for the pay, whereas I have never met someone who works in air traffic control (or most other male-dominated fields) out of interest rather than for the pay. Higher education requirements only increase pay if the labor supply is reduced, e.g., fewer available workers due to some students being unable to complete the course. Given the current pass rates of social work courses, I would argue this is not currently the case. Furthermore, even in male-dominated careers, education does not automatically guarantee higher pay. For example, in New Zealand, a researcher with a PhD in the physical sciences is often paid less than workers in high-demand jobs that do not require advanced education, such as heavy diesel mechanics.
What is your motivation for working in any industry? If money is your highest priority, let that determine your career path. But don’t complain if you enter into a field with your eyes half closed to the $$, if that’s what’s important to you. And if you’ve made an error of judgment about that, it’s not a prison, you can move onto something else if the cost/ benefit analysis suggests that you should.
That is true. We all make decisions that we should go into with eyes wide open. The considerations for essential services that our taxes pay for make it a little more complex as we need people to do those jobs and if we can't attract them because wages are so unattractive that is an issue.
Yep, but then our definition of “essential services” is a arbitrary..consider how “ essential “ supermarket workers& nurses suddenly became during covid, which then became reflected in wage settlements that other industries did not receive, changing historic relativities.
I disagree because.... also it's a four year degree for social work.
In a past life I was a chartered accountant-it paid well. It wasn't an "easy" job but it in NO way compares with the complexities of my "later in life" role as a Registered Social Worker.
Like numerous "woman dominated" roles, the worth of this role is not valued (except perhaps by people we have the privilege of walking alongside).
There are constant struggles for the entities we work for, whether Government agencies, Health Authorities or NGOs contracted to these agencies, to continue to receive the funding they do and it seems every other month there is a "new" initiative that takes precedence over the existing mahi.
Yes, I was at the protest at Brooke's office.
I am absolutely appalled at other women "pulling up the ladder behind them".
Shame on all of them and then to "play" the victim card. Put on your big girl panties sister, because one day a caregiver will be assisting you to do this and you may then realise she is worth EVERY CENT and MORE of her salary.
I challenge any of these politicians to do a day's work in the field of any of these women who have been so poorly treated by this coalition government. Their response to being challenged has clearly shown they do not have the conflict resolution skills required in ALL of our roles.
Bravo, Angela! I'd have been at the protest had I been able to (van Velden is also my MP). Re the meme: I tend to ignore ACT memes if I can, but I think the ATC looks more professional than the social worker, partly because the latter is casually dressed, and sexualised somewhat by the tight-fitting jeans.
She's my M.P too-we all know she got voted in because we wanted Simon and his anti-abortion stance gone so the women of the electorate rallied. Silly Brooke-womanpower will out again next election and she too shall disappear after this performance.
Good point Joanne. Social Workers don't tend to dress as in the meme. They got the stereotype wrong-we all wear batik skirts and birkenstocks. HAHAHAHA.
A big factor usually is who the employer is. This is why the government often pays vastly more in small quangos than big departments for the same role and almost always less where they are the major employer across a large industry like teaching. Are ATCs employed by government or by airports? Are welfare workers vastly underpaid compared to the average HR person? Almost certainly.
Ani, the fact is that there is a significant difference between the concept of equity and the concept of equality. The ACT comparison is entirely valid; there is a significant difference between social workers and air traffic controllers. To simply look at training requirements is to only look at one part of why they are paid differently and should not be compared, but it makes for an instructive lesson on why the concept of pay equity is flawed.
Air traffic controllers are highly paid due to the extremely stressful nature of their job, which demands intense focus, specialised skills, and an almost unique form of responsibility. They manage aircraft movements to ensure safety, preventing collisions and ensuring smooth operations in an often complex airspace. Being an air traffic controller requires quick decision-making, often under extreme pressure, and even small errors can have catastrophic consequences. The job has stressful working conditions and irregular hours due to the need to have someone in the tower at all times when aircraft are operating. Overseas, there are often mandatory retirement ages, although there isn't one in NZ.
There is also a shortage of air traffic controllers in many parts of the world, making it a highly sought-after occupation. In NZ, the form of the training also limits the number of air traffic controllers that we produce. I know that, here in NZ, there is significant competition to get into the ATC training programme.
What all of that means is that, regardless of where you go in the world, you are going to see air traffic controllers paid extremely well to recognise that they are trying to co-ordinate multiples large tubes of metal flying through the air at high speed, often carrying hundreds of people within them, and if they screw up lots of people can die and they don't get a do-over. The stress of that situation is something else and, which is why it is such a specialised job.
Social Workers. Hmm. They apparently play an important role in society, although I have my doubts about their effectiveness. I have no doubts about their good intentions, at least for the most part. I have an uncle who did a social work degree in his 50s, and I have dealt with many social workers in my job. Sadly, my uncle's stories and my experiences have only fueled my cynicism, not added to any admiration. However, let us take it at face value as you describe it.
A social worker self-selects their occupation and does a degree at university, often, as you say, doing a further post-graduate paper or a master's degree. They will then seek a job either with OT or a private social work agency. Both of those organisations are almost certainly government-funded and are supposed to focus on working with families, or protecting children, or similar. The hours are generally regular and based around a weekday, and if you are working for the government, you have significant job security.
While there are times when there is urgency or high stress, for the most part, it is a mix of field work and paperwork. It is not an exact occupation and I can honestly say that I have seen many cases of significant harm caused by social workers, either through their actions, or through their inaction, in the course of my own work.
I would note in passing that I think that Pakinson's Law applies very well to Social Work.
Quite frankly, it is impossible to compare the two jobs. Which was ACT's point.
But I think you, and many, might be missing a more important point. What is 'women's work'? I am a lawyer. Historically, law has been a male-dominated job, yet today it is 56% female. However, if you look at the junior lawyers, which is 0-7 PQE, the law profession is 64% female. Which means that being a lawyer is becoming 'women's work', if we were to look at it through a pay equity type lens. The one thing that we don't account for within the pay equity legislation is the issue of self-selection of occupation and its importance. Allow me to give two illustrations.
I am a criminal defence lawyer. I do a lot of criminal legal aid work, because most criminal offenders don't have much money. Criminal legal aid is somewhat complex, but the easiest way to explain it is that is based on a restricted set of payments based on a guideline hourly rate (in other words, we don't get paid for each hour we work, there are limits). The guideline hourly rate for the most common legal aid work has increased by 21% over the last 26 years. Yet my colleagues and I at the defence bar still do it. Why? Because we are stupid. And also because we choose to do it, knowing we are getting less than we are worth, because it needs to be done. I could earn significantly more if I switched to civil litigation, or if I became a conveyancing lawyer, or a commercial lawyer. But I choose to remain a criminal lawyer.
Example two: my grandfather was a medic in North Afica in WW2. When he went home, he became a nurse. He could make far more money as a miner, which was his previous occupation, but he chose to be a nurse because he found it far more rewarding. He ended up a matron (!) at (I think) Middlemore.
A person exercises their choice to pursue a particular occupation. When they do so, they will be aware what that occupation is likely to pay. If they do not like what that occupation pays, go into a different occupation. Nobody is entitled to do the job they want to do at the wage they want and have someone else provide the job and the wage. And the value of every job is based on factors that are unique to that job. Which is ACT's point.
To be honest I don't think the law change had much to do with women's pay equity from an ideological standpoint. The 2020 law was poorly written, with spurious comparators, and erroneous costing predictions. The unions weaponised it, the Labour government then promised to underwrite the costs in all sectors. It was fiscally irresponsible from the start. If Chris Trotter defends the coalitions' decision to scrap it, you know it must have been bad.
Liz, I can strongly agree with the need for ongoing education, for many professions, not just nursing As an RF and electronics engineer, I never stopped studying and training. Anybody who did would still be working with valves! I also see that many medical treatments and nursing is only possible with with some of the most sophisticated electronics. But I strongly suspect that a worthwhile discussion on Maxwell's equations and Shannon's Laws are impossible
I think the factor that matters the most is are any of these higher paid roles closed to any class of person.
My educated engineers grizzle that salespeople with sales training make more money than them (capital plant, say$5M sales, that have a commission component).
“Having delved into this more than was probably warranted, I am more convinced than ever that everyone got this wrong”
Not everyone Ani. And not Boris. Cos Boris is observant and has never seen a job where a woman is paid less than a man. Ergo no pay inequity. qed.
I do like your honesty Ani, even when you seem forced to challenge what might be considered ‘typical feminist views’. This was another good read and reinforced my decision to sign up fully to your thread.
ATC roles require a higher degree of intelligence than social work. That’s what they’re being paid for. Same as pilots vs bus drivers. And the same as nurses vs police. Being a cop ain’t intellectually challenging for most of them, trust me on this.
The bigger picture here is how society values (or rather undervalues) certain roles. Compare care givers to advertising or real estate. The latter paid way more simply because they produce more ‘wealth’ as per our narrow minded view of value.
But it ain’t a male v female thing and the lefties are idiots for pushing that argument.
A perfect example of pay not reflecting value are Ambulance staff (50/50 male/female). Challenging role, requires brains, often risky, often dealing with shitheads, poor hours etc and doing God’s work. Like nurses, way undervalued. And meanwhile we pay cultural advisers across the motu big salaries for, well, pretty much for no return.
Thanks Boris :) yeah I was on a bit of a rollercoaster with my thinking on this one. It is perfectly reasonable for us to value jobs differently and it is essential for incentivising more complex or dangerous work. I worry some people just want every job to be paid the same. Systems that do that tend not to work out well at all.
Interesting, I had my IQ tested by a clinical psychologist and it came out at 143.
I am a social worker.
What's your number Boris?
Good for you Angela! But sorry, I never give out my number on a first date.
No disrespect intended, but I think it would be a safe bet to say the average intelligence of ATC Controllers would be slightly higher than that of social workers. Nobody is saying that social workers are not valued, nor that the work is not important, but then so is collecting the rubbish (where men are paid less than gynaecologists, just saying).
Touche! In your wildest dreams sir.
Your quote "ATC roles require a higher degree of intelligence than social work. "
Do you have your peer reviewed academic articles at hand?
Wishing you a pleasant evening.
'peer reviewed academic articles'? What are those?
I can't even say my evidence is anecdotal for in truth I have not met many social workers. I've had a bit to do with Air Traffic Controllers though so I relied on that experience and a sweeping stereotype of the Social Worker genus, made my comparison and voila, came up with a most excellent theory. I'd still put money down that you and your big brain are a statistical outlier. Pleased to acknowledge however that you have slightly dented my preconceived notion of said vocation, so thanks for that.
Are the levels of qualifications necessary,add value or even contribute to how a job is done. I question whether a 4 year degree is needed for social work or a 5 year degree for being a librarian...in my profession a 4 year degree was required...learnt more on the job in relation to what was required than at university which really just let me indulge my love of learning ....hence be careful if letting the years of study required to enter a profession be your guide.
Yes. I am quite sceptical of how much emphasis we place on university degrees nowadays rather than job specific training and apprenticeship-style training. There are many professions that I think probably don't need to require the expense and length of a full degree when on the job training would be actually more practical.
Your article makes interesting reading - thanks. One thing your article doesn't cover is the need for ongoing education - as a retired nurse, I look back on a career in which there were only a few years when I wasn't both working and studying - a necessity to keep abreast of research and maintain career credibility. No senior role in nursing requires less than a masters these days. The significant element that formal education introduces is the ability to apply critical thinking to any situation. I have witnessed instances where people with less education have made "commonsense" decisions which have had undesirable outcomes. I am aware that the public generally don't appreciate the depth and breadth of nursing knowledge and practice and I am sure the same applies to many other occupations. That, of course, is reflected in the mp's and public's current questioning of the comparisons between occupations.
Having a family member with severe health issues I am very appreciative of nurses. I think people are unaware of how much of the hospital care is done by nurses while the doctors show up for rounds twice a day.
I imagine that the ongoing training is needed for keeping up to date with new technology and knowledge, but I'm interested to know if you think that nurses are being burdened with two much expectation for higher education eg as you say many need to get a Masters these days.
Yes, the ongoing study can be hard when you have other life commitments. But then I was intent on making a career - others might have different expectations/experiences. Study can be drudgery if you cannot see how it connects to your work, but it can be transformative if you make that connection. Advanced studies also enable you to pursue topics which are of particular interest to you - for me these included such as ethics, sociology and research papers. Other nurses might hone in on clinical subjects such as pharmacology, etc. Those choices depend on the area of health in which you work.
My manly technique to get better pay has been to shift jobs twice when underpaid and to exit an entire profession. Pay equity has just been a Trojan horse to get certain professions better pay, and it seems unfair that farm workers etc haven’t had this mechanism available. I prefer the old fashioned techniques of strikes and worker mobility working their “magic” rather than having some arrogant judges use their overrated intellect to come to some “well argued, finely modulated” but ultimately arbitrary (and often unaffordable) decision.
Yes that is why I point out that the biggest factor in nurses pay increasing in NZ was the 2023 agreement. The police union needs to look at how the nurses' union achieved that.
Nurses have more leverage in negotiations with the government because they can (and did) go on strike. https://www.nzno.org.nz/about_us/media_releases/artmid/4731/articleid/6840/te-whatu-ora-nurses-to-take-nationwide-strike-action
The police are not allowed to strike so they can't force a better deal out of the government using those tactics. https://www.artybees.co.nz/mcgill-david/no-right-strike-history-new-zealand-police-service-organisations
I wonder what they could do instead to apply pressure. Seems unfair!
The obvious reason that the nurses did well was that they had a lot of public support and giving them a good wage increase benefited the then-govt in an election year. I think the current govt offered police a nil-increase, because they could get away with it, but if there's more attrition of police to Oz and a failure to recruit, then the new govt will increase police pay in the coming election year.
It is a very complex subject. I wonder if the explanation for some of the industry related differences is simply how many people want to work in the job? There is also the matter of how intrinsically rewarding each type of work might be.
true - we may need to incentivise joining the police with higher pay then!
Great research into job requirements and pay, but it's a moot point as job pay is typically based on supply and demand. I personally know multiple people who work in fields like teaching or social work purely out of passion rather than for the pay, whereas I have never met someone who works in air traffic control (or most other male-dominated fields) out of interest rather than for the pay. Higher education requirements only increase pay if the labor supply is reduced, e.g., fewer available workers due to some students being unable to complete the course. Given the current pass rates of social work courses, I would argue this is not currently the case. Furthermore, even in male-dominated careers, education does not automatically guarantee higher pay. For example, in New Zealand, a researcher with a PhD in the physical sciences is often paid less than workers in high-demand jobs that do not require advanced education, such as heavy diesel mechanics.
What is your motivation for working in any industry? If money is your highest priority, let that determine your career path. But don’t complain if you enter into a field with your eyes half closed to the $$, if that’s what’s important to you. And if you’ve made an error of judgment about that, it’s not a prison, you can move onto something else if the cost/ benefit analysis suggests that you should.
That is true. We all make decisions that we should go into with eyes wide open. The considerations for essential services that our taxes pay for make it a little more complex as we need people to do those jobs and if we can't attract them because wages are so unattractive that is an issue.
In the marketplace, shortage of supply, including labour, attracts higher reward & vice versa. 😊
Yep, but then our definition of “essential services” is a arbitrary..consider how “ essential “ supermarket workers& nurses suddenly became during covid, which then became reflected in wage settlements that other industries did not receive, changing historic relativities.
Excellent piece, Ani. Full Marx - err, I mean marks.
hahaha thanks Chris :)
I disagree because.... also it's a four year degree for social work.
In a past life I was a chartered accountant-it paid well. It wasn't an "easy" job but it in NO way compares with the complexities of my "later in life" role as a Registered Social Worker.
Like numerous "woman dominated" roles, the worth of this role is not valued (except perhaps by people we have the privilege of walking alongside).
There are constant struggles for the entities we work for, whether Government agencies, Health Authorities or NGOs contracted to these agencies, to continue to receive the funding they do and it seems every other month there is a "new" initiative that takes precedence over the existing mahi.
Yes, I was at the protest at Brooke's office.
I am absolutely appalled at other women "pulling up the ladder behind them".
Shame on all of them and then to "play" the victim card. Put on your big girl panties sister, because one day a caregiver will be assisting you to do this and you may then realise she is worth EVERY CENT and MORE of her salary.
I challenge any of these politicians to do a day's work in the field of any of these women who have been so poorly treated by this coalition government. Their response to being challenged has clearly shown they do not have the conflict resolution skills required in ALL of our roles.
Bravo, Angela! I'd have been at the protest had I been able to (van Velden is also my MP). Re the meme: I tend to ignore ACT memes if I can, but I think the ATC looks more professional than the social worker, partly because the latter is casually dressed, and sexualised somewhat by the tight-fitting jeans.
She's my M.P too-we all know she got voted in because we wanted Simon and his anti-abortion stance gone so the women of the electorate rallied. Silly Brooke-womanpower will out again next election and she too shall disappear after this performance.
Good point Joanne. Social Workers don't tend to dress as in the meme. They got the stereotype wrong-we all wear batik skirts and birkenstocks. HAHAHAHA.
A big factor usually is who the employer is. This is why the government often pays vastly more in small quangos than big departments for the same role and almost always less where they are the major employer across a large industry like teaching. Are ATCs employed by government or by airports? Are welfare workers vastly underpaid compared to the average HR person? Almost certainly.
That's from the same social media team who brought us "pew pew, it's for shooting down Russian planes". They have off days.
Ani, the fact is that there is a significant difference between the concept of equity and the concept of equality. The ACT comparison is entirely valid; there is a significant difference between social workers and air traffic controllers. To simply look at training requirements is to only look at one part of why they are paid differently and should not be compared, but it makes for an instructive lesson on why the concept of pay equity is flawed.
Air traffic controllers are highly paid due to the extremely stressful nature of their job, which demands intense focus, specialised skills, and an almost unique form of responsibility. They manage aircraft movements to ensure safety, preventing collisions and ensuring smooth operations in an often complex airspace. Being an air traffic controller requires quick decision-making, often under extreme pressure, and even small errors can have catastrophic consequences. The job has stressful working conditions and irregular hours due to the need to have someone in the tower at all times when aircraft are operating. Overseas, there are often mandatory retirement ages, although there isn't one in NZ.
There is also a shortage of air traffic controllers in many parts of the world, making it a highly sought-after occupation. In NZ, the form of the training also limits the number of air traffic controllers that we produce. I know that, here in NZ, there is significant competition to get into the ATC training programme.
What all of that means is that, regardless of where you go in the world, you are going to see air traffic controllers paid extremely well to recognise that they are trying to co-ordinate multiples large tubes of metal flying through the air at high speed, often carrying hundreds of people within them, and if they screw up lots of people can die and they don't get a do-over. The stress of that situation is something else and, which is why it is such a specialised job.
Social Workers. Hmm. They apparently play an important role in society, although I have my doubts about their effectiveness. I have no doubts about their good intentions, at least for the most part. I have an uncle who did a social work degree in his 50s, and I have dealt with many social workers in my job. Sadly, my uncle's stories and my experiences have only fueled my cynicism, not added to any admiration. However, let us take it at face value as you describe it.
A social worker self-selects their occupation and does a degree at university, often, as you say, doing a further post-graduate paper or a master's degree. They will then seek a job either with OT or a private social work agency. Both of those organisations are almost certainly government-funded and are supposed to focus on working with families, or protecting children, or similar. The hours are generally regular and based around a weekday, and if you are working for the government, you have significant job security.
While there are times when there is urgency or high stress, for the most part, it is a mix of field work and paperwork. It is not an exact occupation and I can honestly say that I have seen many cases of significant harm caused by social workers, either through their actions, or through their inaction, in the course of my own work.
I would note in passing that I think that Pakinson's Law applies very well to Social Work.
Quite frankly, it is impossible to compare the two jobs. Which was ACT's point.
But I think you, and many, might be missing a more important point. What is 'women's work'? I am a lawyer. Historically, law has been a male-dominated job, yet today it is 56% female. However, if you look at the junior lawyers, which is 0-7 PQE, the law profession is 64% female. Which means that being a lawyer is becoming 'women's work', if we were to look at it through a pay equity type lens. The one thing that we don't account for within the pay equity legislation is the issue of self-selection of occupation and its importance. Allow me to give two illustrations.
I am a criminal defence lawyer. I do a lot of criminal legal aid work, because most criminal offenders don't have much money. Criminal legal aid is somewhat complex, but the easiest way to explain it is that is based on a restricted set of payments based on a guideline hourly rate (in other words, we don't get paid for each hour we work, there are limits). The guideline hourly rate for the most common legal aid work has increased by 21% over the last 26 years. Yet my colleagues and I at the defence bar still do it. Why? Because we are stupid. And also because we choose to do it, knowing we are getting less than we are worth, because it needs to be done. I could earn significantly more if I switched to civil litigation, or if I became a conveyancing lawyer, or a commercial lawyer. But I choose to remain a criminal lawyer.
Example two: my grandfather was a medic in North Afica in WW2. When he went home, he became a nurse. He could make far more money as a miner, which was his previous occupation, but he chose to be a nurse because he found it far more rewarding. He ended up a matron (!) at (I think) Middlemore.
A person exercises their choice to pursue a particular occupation. When they do so, they will be aware what that occupation is likely to pay. If they do not like what that occupation pays, go into a different occupation. Nobody is entitled to do the job they want to do at the wage they want and have someone else provide the job and the wage. And the value of every job is based on factors that are unique to that job. Which is ACT's point.
To be honest I don't think the law change had much to do with women's pay equity from an ideological standpoint. The 2020 law was poorly written, with spurious comparators, and erroneous costing predictions. The unions weaponised it, the Labour government then promised to underwrite the costs in all sectors. It was fiscally irresponsible from the start. If Chris Trotter defends the coalitions' decision to scrap it, you know it must have been bad.
A McKenna
Enlightening as usual, Ani. I enjoy your writing!
Liz, I can strongly agree with the need for ongoing education, for many professions, not just nursing As an RF and electronics engineer, I never stopped studying and training. Anybody who did would still be working with valves! I also see that many medical treatments and nursing is only possible with with some of the most sophisticated electronics. But I strongly suspect that a worthwhile discussion on Maxwell's equations and Shannon's Laws are impossible
I think the factor that matters the most is are any of these higher paid roles closed to any class of person.
My educated engineers grizzle that salespeople with sales training make more money than them (capital plant, say$5M sales, that have a commission component).
I say well then apply for the job.