Asda faces mass legal action over equal pay for women

[WestRedMaple]

Nothing wrong with different pay for different work.

If the work was equally valued, then legal action to get equal pay would be completely unnecessary

[Central Slavia]

The case is about whether they do work of equivalent value, not whether they do the same job.

Precisely.

If Person A is doing Job A and Person B is doing Job B, and these jobs are of equivalent value to their employer, and Person B is getting paid more than Person A then you would wonder why. Perhaps on an individual basis this could be explained by a range of factors, such as qualifications, or experience. Where it's a whole group of people who have historically been undervalued in the workplace (Group A) being paid less for work of equivalent value than another group of people who have historically been more valued in the workplace, across virtually all of the workplace, (Group B), then it's perfectly reasonable for members of Group A to question why they are not being given equivalent pay for work of equivalent value and to argue that the disparity is motivated, consciously or not, by discrimination arguably related to the lesser value historically attributed to Group A's work.

And, frankly, members of Group B who are bitching about how its so unfair that people from Group A would like equivalent pay for equivalent work can basically shut the fuck up.

This is full of shit.
Both jobs are of equivalent value in the sense that a supermarket couldn't do without them, but warehouse work is more physically demanding.
But, you know what? I'll support this even though it's a bullshit argument because it means retail workers will get a raise at the expense of an asshole capitalist company.

[The Nihilistic view]

The case is about whether they do work of equivalent value, not whether they do the same job. I can certainly see that someone working in sales, someone working in clerical role, and someone working in a warehouse all have pretty similar value to an organisation, it couldn't do without any of them but they are all pretty low skilled low paid jobs.

Not really, retail jobs (excluding shelving) are less necessary with advent of technology than warehouse ones. It is perfectly possible to reduce retail jobs to one/two customer assistants, night stockers and two security guards and business would function normally if you put in more self service, better signage and more ways to reach reduced assistants. Warehouse on the other hand requires people for most of its tasks.
Ergo, warehouse staff are more valuable than retail ones.

You seem to be under the impression that high tech warehouses have not been invented yet. They have, some modern warehouses are fantastically fitted out with tech.

And the fact you think a supermarket could get by with one or two costumer assistants is laughable. Most supermarkets need more than that on the tobacco counter. Then you have the meat, fish, bakery and cheese counters each with another one or two staff. All jobs that can't be automated cost efficiently or in the case of tobacco legally.

[Great Nepal]

Eh... Given that, when I was driving a truck, I once picked up at a warehouse that was almost entirely automated, I'm not sure this is true.
Was really cool, too. I punched my load number into the console, and robots went to get the goods and loaded them in the trailer two pallets abreast.

Hmm, looking at Kiva I suppose more automated warehouse is possible but even then that requires complete redesign of warehouse and still requires individuals to manually select goods (although this could be eliminated if each shelf was for one good at cost of floor space). By contrast, largely automated retail doesn't change as much on status quo (replace checkouts with self service stations, add more signs and place some kind of phone on every lane to contact customer assistant).
In future possibly but at present I would still put warehouse staff as less replaceable than retail simply due to higher costs of switching (equipment and way of working).

[Great Nepal]

And the fact you think a supermarket could get by with one or two costumer assistants is laughable. Most supermarkets need more than that on the tobacco counter.

Self service with security guard to check ID as and when required.

Then you have the meat, fish, bakery and cheese counters each with another one or two staff.All jobs that can't be automated cost efficiently.

- Customer takes pre-cut meat (replace with bakery, cheese, whatever)
- Customer takes it to self service machine.
- Customer touches meat, then chicken.
- Customer places the polythene on weighing scale.
- Machine displays and adds price of meat to the total price.

in the case of tobacco legally.

Tobacco sale requires someone to check ID, that can be done by one of the security guards once customer checks out.

[Galloism]

Eh... Given that, when I was driving a truck, I once picked up at a warehouse that was almost entirely automated, I'm not sure this is true.
Was really cool, too. I punched my load number into the console, and robots went to get the goods and loaded them in the trailer two pallets abreast.

Hmm, looking at Kiva I suppose more automated warehouse is possible but even then that requires complete redesign of warehouse and still requires individuals to manually select goods (although this could be eliminated if each shelf was for one good at cost of floor space). By contrast, largely automated retail doesn't change as much on status quo (replace checkouts with self service stations, add more signs and place some kind of phone on every lane to contact customer assistant).
In future possibly but at present I would still put warehouse staff as less replaceable than retail simply due to higher costs of switching (equipment and way of working).

What do you mean "manually select their goods"?

[Nadkor]

The case is about whether they do work of equivalent value, not whether they do the same job. I can certainly see that someone working in sales, someone working in clerical role, and someone working in a warehouse all have pretty similar value to an organisation, it couldn't do without any of them but they are all pretty low skilled low paid jobs.

Not really, retail jobs (excluding shelving) are less necessary with advent of technology than warehouse ones. It is perfectly possible to reduce retail jobs to one/two customer assistants, night stockers and two security guards and business would function normally if you put in more self service, better signage and more ways to reach reduced assistants. Warehouse on the other hand requires people for most of its tasks.
Ergo, warehouse staff are more valuable than retail ones.

Yeah...in the real world, where grown-ups live, warehousing is something that is far more easily automated than the floor.

[The Nihilistic view]

Not really, retail jobs (excluding shelving) are less necessary with advent of technology than warehouse ones. It is perfectly possible to reduce retail jobs to one/two customer assistants, night stockers and two security guards and business would function normally if you put in more self service, better signage and more ways to reach reduced assistants. Warehouse on the other hand requires people for most of its tasks.
Ergo, warehouse staff are more valuable than retail ones.

Eh... Given that, when I was driving a truck, I once picked up at a warehouse that was almost entirely automated, I'm not sure this is true.

Was really cool, too. I punched my load number into the console, and robots went to get the goods and loaded them in the trailer two pallets abreast.

Yes, in many sectors it's possible for warehouses to be more automated and make greater use of tech than the retail side. I must say that sounds pretty cool, the most automation we have to move goods around our warehouse is a Mk1 human operating a pallet truck!

[Great Nepal]

Hmm, looking at Kiva I suppose more automated warehouse is possible but even then that requires complete redesign of warehouse and still requires individuals to manually select goods (although this could be eliminated if each shelf was for one good at cost of floor space). By contrast, largely automated retail doesn't change as much on status quo (replace checkouts with self service stations, add more signs and place some kind of phone on every lane to contact customer assistant).
In future possibly but at present I would still put warehouse staff as less replaceable than retail simply due to higher costs of switching (equipment and way of working).

What do you mean "manually select their goods"?

According to Kiva, the robot only brings the shelf not the actual goods to person who then has to pick the right one.

[Nadkor]

I have, in fact, worked both. Neither were in Asda - I worked in the warehouse in a Sainsbury's and on the floor/checkouts in a Tesco.

I am not strong, and I am not a particularly physical person generally, but give me the warehouse any day of the week. The floor is equally as 'back-breaking' as the warehouse, but in the warehouse you don't have to deal with the general fucking public.

Ask anyone who works in retail and they will tell you that the worst part of their job is the public. Any retail worker dealing with the public on a regular basis is a saint if they haven't snapped and killed after half an hour. Asda should be paying these people millions.

I would say public interaction can be one of the best thing about it.

Have you spoken with a psychiatrist lately?!

[Nadkor]

Precisely.

If Person A is doing Job A and Person B is doing Job B, and these jobs are of equivalent value to their employer, and Person B is getting paid more than Person A then you would wonder why. Perhaps on an individual basis this could be explained by a range of factors, such as qualifications, or experience. Where it's a whole group of people who have historically been undervalued in the workplace (Group A) being paid less for work of equivalent value than another group of people who have historically been more valued in the workplace, across virtually all of the workplace, (Group B), then it's perfectly reasonable for members of Group A to question why they are not being given equivalent pay for work of equivalent value and to argue that the disparity is motivated, consciously or not, by discrimination arguably related to the lesser value historically attributed to Group A's work.

And, frankly, members of Group B who are bitching about how its so unfair that people from Group A would like equivalent pay for equivalent work can basically shut the fuck up.

This is full of shit.

Yes, but you see it actually isn't. At all.

[Susurruses]

Worked warehouse.
Worked retail.

Give me the damn warehouse any day.
As others have mentioned, it's generally pretty similar work and you don't have to deal with the general public either.

As for those complaining about being paid fair wages for their work and somehow this provoking increased automation and that somehow being bad...
Why don't you go back to when streetlights had to be lit by individuals employed to do so?
Or calculations were done exclusively by humans instead of machines?
Or literally any other menial work that's been made redundant or much simpler through increased use of technology.

Frankly, roll on the robot revolution.
Maybe the solution is in fact not to screw people over so you can employ more people but to implement a universal basic income (or something similar) so that people can live *gasp* without being screwed over by corporations, producing things of value in their own time & purchasing the works of others (or of our beloved robot assistants/overlords).


Short version:
It's not about you, it's not about men, quit trying to play the "woe is me" card.

[Galloism]

What do you mean "manually select their goods"?

According to Kiva, the robot only brings the shelf not the actual goods to person who then has to pick the right one.

Yeah that's nothing like the system I saw.

The system that I saw just took the order number, asked for trailer length, asked me to clear the movement zone, and went to work.

It loaded the truck and told me that I could leave, and spit out a seal.

[The Nihilistic view]

And the fact you think a supermarket could get by with one or two costumer assistants is laughable. Most supermarkets need more than that on the tobacco counter.

Self service with security guard to check ID as and when required.

Then you have the meat, fish, bakery and cheese counters each with another one or two staff.All jobs that can't be automated cost efficiently.

- Customer takes pre-cut meat (replace with bakery, cheese, whatever)
- Customer takes it to self service machine.
- Customer touches meat, then chicken.
- Customer places the polythene on weighing scale.
- Machine displays and adds price of meat to the total price.

in the case of tobacco legally.

Tobacco sale requires someone to check ID, that can be done by one of the security guards once customer checks out.

Self service of tobacco is illegal in the UK. It can't even be on visible public display in some parts of the UK.

And if a customer want's a different weight of meat to what has been pre-cut? That is after all one reason these counters still exist and people use then when they could buy pre-packed meat.

Tobacco sale requires a shop assistant to get the product requested.

Your solutions aren't solutions as they either cut down on consumer choice, a choice consumers want to have or they would break the law. This is before we come to the issue of customer service, something that would be virtually impossible to provide on the minuscule staffing levels you suggest. It's hard enough to find somebody for help in a supermarket at current staffing levels. They are counter productive and would frustrate customers and send them elsewhere.

So Nep, can you become chief executive of Tesco?

[Southern Hampshire]

I'll support this even though it's a bullshit argument because it means retail workers will get a raise at the expense of an asshole capitalist company.

So you support unemployment?

After all, this asshole capitalist company provides 110k jobs.

[Ashmoria]

Ah jeez, looks like Asda has been falling afoul of equal pay for equal wo-

The women claim they are not paid the same as male workers in the distribution warehouses - despite their jobs being of "equivalent value".

Oh.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29753702
Ohhhhh.

So now we're up to equal pay for unequal work.

So there's going to be legal action because Asda employs more women in retail, and more men in the warehouse.
The retailers are paid less than the warehouse workers.

Some of you may think "No shit, it's a more physically demanding job, carries more risk of injury or death, and they are often outside in all weathers, and requires things like a forklift license." but that would be sexist, because misogyny, because feminism.

While an argument can be made that traditionally female professions are underpaid compared to the traditionally male professions (And a counter-argument can be made that this is for good cause, and that the solution is to make those professions gender neutral, not overpay people doing less essential professions), this simply doesn't work on a working class in retail level. There, everyone is treated equally shit.
It's worth noting that the male retail employees have caught on that, they too can benefit from nonsensical ideologies, acting entitled, and throwing temper tantrums; and have decided to join the bandwagon for a pay raise by telling their bosses that they hate women if they refuse.
See? Feminism helps men after all! You just have to give up your principles first.

Should they get one? Yeh probably. But so should the warehouse workers.
(Some of whom, shocker, are women.)

What do you think NSG?

seems like an interesting concept that probably has a better basis than what you outline. its a lawsuit so either the theory fits british law or it doesn't. they seem to think it does or why else bother suing over it.

[Central Slavia]

I'll support this even though it's a bullshit argument because it means retail workers will get a raise at the expense of an asshole capitalist company.

So you support unemployment?

After all, this asshole capitalist company provides 110k jobs.

Nah.
If they fire people based on this sort of a lawsuit, it'll lead to another one.
Ultimately, I support such companies being nationalized.

[Dejanic]

pay should reflect the difficulty of the job, and the warehouse one seems to be more difficult.

I have, in fact, worked both. Neither were in Asda - I worked in the warehouse in a Sainsbury's and on the floor/checkouts in a Tesco.

I am not strong, and I am not a particularly physical person generally, but give me the warehouse any day of the week. The floor is equally as 'back-breaking' as the warehouse, but in the warehouse you don't have to deal with the general fucking public.

Ask anyone who works in retail and they will tell you that the worst part of their job is the public. Any retail worker dealing with the public on a regular basis is a saint if they haven't snapped and killed after half an hour. Asda should be paying these people millions.

This is definitely true, and whilst it's not exactly the same as traditional retail, it's largely similar in the fast food industry, and at night it's actually dangerous sometimes.

We had 4 drunk people run and jump/climb over the tills last night at Maccy Dees.

[The Nihilistic view]

Ah jeez, looks like Asda has been falling afoul of equal pay for equal wo-


Oh.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29753702
Ohhhhh.

So now we're up to equal pay for unequal work.

So there's going to be legal action because Asda employs more women in retail, and more men in the warehouse.
The retailers are paid less than the warehouse workers.

Some of you may think "No shit, it's a more physically demanding job, carries more risk of injury or death, and they are often outside in all weathers, and requires things like a forklift license." but that would be sexist, because misogyny, because feminism.

While an argument can be made that traditionally female professions are underpaid compared to the traditionally male professions (And a counter-argument can be made that this is for good cause, and that the solution is to make those professions gender neutral, not overpay people doing less essential professions), this simply doesn't work on a working class in retail level. There, everyone is treated equally shit.
It's worth noting that the male retail employees have caught on that, they too can benefit from nonsensical ideologies, acting entitled, and throwing temper tantrums; and have decided to join the bandwagon for a pay raise by telling their bosses that they hate women if they refuse.
See? Feminism helps men after all! You just have to give up your principles first.

Should they get one? Yeh probably. But so should the warehouse workers.
(Some of whom, shocker, are women.)

What do you think NSG?

seems like an interesting concept that probably has a better basis than what you outline. its a lawsuit so either the theory fits british law or it doesn't. they seem to think it does or why else bother suing over it.

Because the people who encouraged the case are a bunch of bloodsucking no win no fee chancers so the employees therefore get a fee shot at a pot of gold.

[Southern Hampshire]

So you support unemployment?

After all, this asshole capitalist company provides 110k jobs.

Nah.
If they fire people based on this sort of a lawsuit, it'll lead to another one.
Ultimately, I support such companies being nationalized.

There is no such thing as a lawsuit for firing people after this.

[Dejanic]

So you support unemployment?

After all, this asshole capitalist company provides 110k jobs.

Nah.
If they fire people based on this sort of a lawsuit, it'll lead to another one.
Ultimately, I support such companies being nationalized.

You want Asda nationalised?

Why?

[Sklavinia]

I like how people are trying to create an issue where one doesn't exist. Can I go live on Mars now?

[Bombadil]

So much in the world to be angry about and people choose fair pay.. Tesco executives get paid hundreds and thousands to screw up, cleared by auditors, and this is but a small sample of corporate malfeasance.. let alone the global flattening if not real term decline of low end wages..

..but no, some women are asking for equal pay.. I wonder if they weigh the same as ducks so we can burn them.

[Central Slavia]

Nah.
If they fire people based on this sort of a lawsuit, it'll lead to another one.
Ultimately, I support such companies being nationalized.

There is no such thing as a lawsuit for firing people after this.

I'm pretty damn sure that if you win some sort of compensation from your employer, and he fires you right afterwards, you can take him to court over that, and if you can show the two were related, it's bad time for him. Otherwise, employers could block employees from exercising their rights really easily.

[Central Slavia]

Nah.
If they fire people based on this sort of a lawsuit, it'll lead to another one.
Ultimately, I support such companies being nationalized.

You want Asda nationalised?

Why?

Because all large companies should be?
They are creating their profit by exploiting workers. Common ownership of means of production is preferrable.