Worth less than men?

Award-winning health reporter ELEANOR BRADFORD on the gender pay debate

AS THE health correspondent for BBC Scotland, my work was up on screen most days for nearly 15 years, for everyone to see and judge.

As well as reporting on all the different crises that hit the NHS week after week, I tried to provide analysis beyond the endless headlines, and investigate the issues that were really affecting people’s lives.

I investigated the scandal of Scotland’s blood supplies being infected with HIV and hepatitis C, for example, and the pressure this put the Scottish Government under led to an official inquiry.

Quite a few of those stories were my exclusives.

Behind the scenes, life was hectic and demanding. I was permanently on call and regularly travelled all over Scotland to attend press conferences and conduct interviews.

Courage

Health is such a fundamental issue for so many of us, and the health correspondent’s role at BBC Scotland was one of the busiest briefs.

But around the middle of my time in the role, which lasted from 2001 to 2016, I started to realise that other people were being appointed on higher salaries than I was earning, having been in the job for many years.

I plucked up the courage to ask my male colleagues what they were earning and was amazed to find I was on significantly less. I raised the matter with my managers.

My salary ranged from £40,000 to £60,000 over the years that I worked as the BBC’s health correspondent.

Some of my male colleagues were already on £10,000 more than me. One or two wouldn’t reveal their salaries and I suspected it was because the gap was even greater.

I was not earning the enormous salaries we have heard about in recent weeks, not by a long shot. I felt I was remunerated properly and my salary was appropriate for a publicly funded body, but yet there was this unfairness.

I was very conscious that I was publicly funded by licence-fee payers. I would cycle to press conferences sometimes, if it saved the BBC a taxi fare.

And, of course, public funding meant we were under constant political scrutiny in our reporting.

That is why, initially, I wasn’t surprised when my requests for a raise were turned down.

We had been through several rounds of redundancies and we were all doing more for less. But I slowly learned that my male colleagues seemed to get increases while I did not.

I changed my approach. I asked my managers for an equal pay review.

As soon as I mentioned those words, and to my surprise, I received an email telling me I was getting an immediate pay rise of £5,000.

Clearly, I had a case, but my suggestion that it should be backdated was ridiculed.

I was still left earning less than the male colleagues with equally demanding jobs.

Yet I was winning awards. I was twice named Regional Medical Journalist of the Year by the Medical Journalists’ Association and I was one of the busiest BBC Scotland correspondents.

I was regularly on network news, which was broadcasting to the whole of the UK, not just Scotland. Not all correspondents did that – and those who did were earning significantly more than I was.

In one of my annual appraisals I was told I was a ‘model correspondent’. Did that deserve average pay?

All the demands that were being made of me were part and parcel of the job and I understood and accepted that. But when my partner, Ross, and I decided to adopt two boys, we knew I could be – and was – regularly called upon at a moment’s notice to travel anywhere in Scotland.

Ross gave up his job to be at home with the boys, who are now eight and 11, because they needed extra care and support.

This meant I became our family’s sole breadwinner. An equal salary became not just an issue of fairness for me, but essential in order for me to support my children.

I carried on for a while but eventually I felt that I was not going to get any more pay.

I also felt that there were not many opportunities for me to further my career within the BBC, and these were the main reasons why I moved on.

Diversity

They did make me an interesting offer to stay, but it didn’t involve more pay and it wasn’t a promotion, so I decided to leave.

I immediately went into a management role as head of communications at the University of Aberdeen and now I am an associate partner at communications agency Spey.

I kept all of my requests for pay reviews internal, and did not take any legal action because I know it is public money, at the end of the day.

I did make a fuss and I spoke to management about it, and I was put on a diversity panel because I was well known internally as someone who felt strongly about this.

But, ultimately, it didn’t really lead to change. When colleagues asked me if I would put my name and case forward to the UK Parliament’s Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee’s inquiry on gender pay, there was no doubt in my mind that I should do so.

A number of other cases from BBC women have been put forward anonymously and they did not give their names out of concern for their BBC careers, but because I have left the organisation I feel I can talk freely.

I am no longer a member of the National Union of Journalists but I am keeping an eye on the cases of other BBC women which are being taken up by the union.

However, it may come down to whether the amount of any compensation payment is worth the legal costs.

Bias

I think what was going on at the BBC was unconscious bias in society being played out in the recruitment and pay scales of the organisation.

It wasn’t just male managers who were deciding my salary, it was women as well.

We know from lots of research that if you give two CVs to a bunch of people, and one of them is for someone called John and one of them is for someone called Jennifer, that same bunch of men and women will decide that John should be paid more, and is more trustworthy.

Unconscious bias is subtle but it pervades every part of society.

The way the BBC can move forward is with clear targets with incentives to meet them, and better training for those who are hiring.

It is a much-loved institution but has a duty to fix this problem because it should be reporting on unfairness, not perpetuating it.

People can see the job that I did and the job that my peers were doing, and make up their own mind.

Was I worth less, or was I just as good as the men who were earning £10,000 a year more than me?

The viewers can judge for themselves.