Judith Woods There’s nothing first-class about a degree today
Before I begin my denunciation of the BBC’S egregious gender pay gap, can someone please issue a new publicity pic of Claudia Winkleman? One in which we have cast-iron proof that the come-hither
Strictly presenter is wearing clothes? On second thoughts, her kohl-rimmed sexiness sums up perfectly the female attributes for which the corporation is willing to pay top dollar, so let’s leave as is.
I say top dollar, but, as we are now acutely aware, a higher-value currency applies to male presenters. Not only are there just two women among its top 14 earners, but male and female presenters sitting on the same sofa doing the same job do not get the same salary. That certainly accounted for a certain frostiness this week between
BBC Breakfast’s Louise Minchin, 48, an early morning stalwart for the past 11 years, and newcomer Dan Walker, 40.
She didn’t even make the list of stars earning £150,000 or more for her pink job. For his blue job (and appearances on Football Focus), Walker gets up to £250,000. Awkward.
As the eye-watering figures have been published, social media has gone into overdrive. For a start, there’s been a lot of dismay that actors playing nurses – Derek Thompson banks up to £400,000 for his downbeat portrayal of Charlie Fairhead in Casualty – get paid so much more than actual nurses being nurses. Then there’s also the thought-provoking argument that if women are blatantly undercutting men’s wages, Britain should think about getting rid of them all when we Brexit. Then wonder why there’s no tea on the table.
But personally, I’m wondering what powers the 13th Doctor Who, Jodie Whittaker, used to ensure pay parity with her predecessor; Peter Capaldi was on between £200,000 and £250,000 a year. Knock me down with a sonic screwdriver!
Historical discrepancies, differentials and disparities take a long time to redress; although it should happen a lot quicker now the BBC has been forced to air its exceedingly expensive laundry under duress from its new royal charter, which guarantees the licence fee for another 11 years.
There are lots of high-profile names such as Sir David Attenborough and Mary Berry who are paid through different channels, so not everyone has been named, but we get the general gist: women, it seems, are simply not valued as highly as men by BBC bosses.
They are not alone in their sexistpiggery. The 2016 National Management Salary survey of 60,000 managers in the UK showed that no progress has been made on reducing a 23 per cent pay gap between the genders. The national average is 9.4 per cent for full-time employees, rising to 18 per cent for full- and part-time workers. Paradoxically, in female-dominated industries, the problem can be even more acute. In public relations, men earn an average £8,483 more than women, an anomaly unexplained by length of service, seniority, parenthood, or a higher prevalence of part-time work among their female colleagues.
Imagine if the opposite were happening, and men were being underpaid? There would be riots. You don’t have to be a woman to feel fury that the old boys’ network is quietly, stubbornly militating against us.
What’s infuriating is that it is still happening a full 47 years after the Equal Pay Act was passed in 1970, two years after the women at Ford’s factory in Dagenham walked out in protest over a pay divide.
How can we hold our heads up and tell our daughters to strive if the system is weighted against them for no good reason other than institutionalised chauvinism? I’m pleased and relieved that it’s not just the mothers of girls who are angry; the gender pay gap affects mothers, sisters, wives. It also bespeaks an antediluvian attitude towards women in the workplace that we all knew about, but which men – even partners, fathers and brothers – refused to believe existed.
Happily, consultants Deloitte last year estimated that the pay gap is closing, and will be entirely eradicated… by 2069. Yes, that’s 99 years after we all thought the matter had been settled.
As of April this year, all private sector companies with more than 250 employees have to publish a gender pay gap report, by law. They have 12 months to do this initially; thereafter, they must do so on April 5 every year.
I look forward to reading each and every one. Would it be cynical of me to aver that naming and shaming works better than persuasion every time?
But back to the BBC, where apologists say that men earn more because they’ve been there a long time, but therein lies another rub. Male presenters are allowed to age visibly; it only adds to their big-beast kudos.
Thus, we have Chris “£2.2million” Evans, who is 51, and Gary “£1.75million” Lineker, 56. Graham Norton is 54 and earns upwards of £850,000 (his chat show brings in heaps more), and 52-year-old Jeremy Vine nets over £700,000 a year.
By contrast, in eighth place, we have Winkleman, 45, earning between £450,000 and £500,000. The next best paid woman is The One Show’s
Alex Jones, 40, who is in the £400,000-to-£450,000 bracket.
Then, at 15th place on the list, is Fiona Bruce, a mature 53 years of age, who receives a salary of between £350,00 and £400,000 for reading the news and presenting Antiques
Roadshow. Is she worth that much? I really couldn’t say. But I do wonder why Huw Edwards is worth £200,000 more. Is it down to his twinkle or his winkle?
The BBC can try to explain away such discrepancies (to a no-doubt livid Fiona, for a start), but the lack of pay parity is endemic in our country and it has to stop. This isn’t a feminist thing – it’s a fairness thing.
‘Imagine if men were being underpaid? There’d be riots’