Asda faces mass legal action over equal pay for women

[Ashmoria]

I think it makes sense that the warehouse workers get payed more than the retail workers regardless of gender.

how would you know?

the court will decide if the case has merit or not.

[Dakini]

I think it makes sense that the warehouse workers get payed more than the retail workers regardless of gender.

Having worked in both, I disagree. Most of my retail jobs involved more training than the factory jobs I had. Something like operating a forklift should be paid more because it requires a license and all that, but if someone's job is just picking up boxes and moving them to a different place or picking out items that go into a box, putting them in the box and sealing the box shut, then it's at least as easy as working retail, except that working retail involves additional work on top of unpacking boxes and stocking shelves.

[Nadkor]

Butthurt MRA dickheads furiously working themselves into a froth of misogyny?

That seems to be about it.

The fun part here is that if the women win, this ruling would also benefit all the men who work in the retail sector of the company too. You'd think it would be a win-win situation as far as it goes.

This will be because MRAs, like Ostro, don't actually care about helping men. They don't. You don't see them actually talking about or doing anything of any substance that would actually help men. No, instead they sit on the internet and complain that women only care about themselves and never do anything to help men (which, of course, is plainly untrue) . They will oppose anything that primarily benefits women and don't care that it may help men as well. They offer no solutions, no answers, and nothing of any value, instead focusing on spewing sexist bullshit in the direction of anybody who dares to challenge their worldview in an attempt to destroy them. And why won't the girl in English class have sex with them? After all, they were nice to her that one time so surely she owes them.

They're reactionaries who oppose any notion of equality between men and women. Why? Because, at heart, they're desperate misogynists struggling pathetically to keep the uppity women in our place - as objects existing solely for the enjoyment of men.

[Nadkor]

I think it makes sense that the warehouse workers get payed more than the retail workers regardless of gender.

Why?

[Central Slavia]

The fun part here is that if the women win, this ruling would also benefit all the men who work in the retail sector of the company too. You'd think it would be a win-win situation as far as it goes.

This will be because MRAs, like Ostro, don't actually care about helping men. They don't. You don't see them actually talking about or doing anything of any substance that would actually help men. No, instead they sit on the internet and complain that women only care about themselves and never do anything to help men (which, of course, is plainly untrue) . They will oppose anything that primarily benefits women and don't care that it may help men as well. They offer no solutions, no answers, and nothing of any value, instead focusing on spewing sexist bullshit in the direction of anybody who dares to challenge their worldview in an attempt to destroy them. And why won't the girl in English class have sex with them? After all, they were nice to her that one time so surely she owes them.

They're reactionaries who oppose any notion of equality between men and women. Why? Because, at heart, they're desperate misogynists struggling pathetically to keep the uppity women in our place - as objects existing solely for the enjoyment of men.

Armchair psychoanalysis 101, course taught by prof. Nadkor

[Bojikami]

I think it makes sense that the warehouse workers get payed more than the retail workers regardless of gender.

Why?

Greater possibility of workplace injuries, etc.

[Dejanic]

This will be because MRAs, like Ostro, don't actually care about helping men. They don't. You don't see them actually talking about or doing anything of any substance that would actually help men. No, instead they sit on the internet and complain that women only care about themselves and never do anything to help men (which, of course, is plainly untrue) . They will oppose anything that primarily benefits women and don't care that it may help men as well. They offer no solutions, no answers, and nothing of any value, instead focusing on spewing sexist bullshit in the direction of anybody who dares to challenge their worldview in an attempt to destroy them. And why won't the girl in English class have sex with them? After all, they were nice to her that one time so surely she owes them.

They're reactionaries who oppose any notion of equality between men and women. Why? Because, at heart, they're desperate misogynists struggling pathetically to keep the uppity women in our place - as objects existing solely for the enjoyment of men.

Armchair psychoanalysis 101, course taught by prof. Nadkor

She's still right though.

MRA's simply hate women, they have an awful track record in this regard, and in general they offer very few solutions to any of the problems that men face,

[Rhodisia]

They are entirely different classes of jobs. People should not gripe when one profession is dominated by men, or women. Men make better warehouse workers, and women are better clerks. That's just the way it is. I don't see what the fucking deal is.

[Risottia]

I don't guess so. The scale of the stuff one is shelving in the retail area is rather different from what happens in the warehouse.

It depends. In a warehouse, if you're lifting anything more than one box at a time, you've probably got them out on a pallet and you're lifting them with a forklift.

True. Then again, operating a forklift requires a specific licence iirc, plus a warehouse is more dangerous and less comfortable as a workplace than the inside of a retail store.

[Ashmoria]

They are entirely different classes of jobs. People should not gripe when one profession is dominated by men, or women. Men make better warehouse workers, and women are better clerks. That's just the way it is. I don't see what the fucking deal is.

the deal is that loading the pallet and unloading the pallet are substantially the same job with the same work value.

[Avenio]

Butthurt MRA dickheads furiously working themselves into a froth of misogyny?

That seems to be about it.

The fun part here is that if the women win, this ruling would also benefit all the men who work in the retail sector of the company too. You'd think it would be a win-win situation as far as it goes.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people - many of them ostensibly progressive or having left-of-centre viewpoints - have bought into the narrative that workers' rights is a zero sum game, where benefits for one sector can only be gained through cannibalizing another's. It's bullshit, and has always been bullshit.

[Dakini]

It depends. In a warehouse, if you're lifting anything more than one box at a time, you've probably got them out on a pallet and you're lifting them with a forklift.

True. Then again, operating a forklift requires a specific licence iirc, plus a warehouse is more dangerous and less comfortable as a workplace than the inside of a retail store.

That depends on the store and it depends on the warehouse. It also depends on the specific job.

[Ralkovian Grand Island]

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.

From the same people who brought you Stalin and Kim Jong Il. We present to you our newest product from the "Shit. We really fucked up everything. There's a fuck ton of starving people" line: Nationalization!

Yes, you too can create vast inefficiency with a single government takeover. Capitalists giving jobs exploiting your poor subjects, just rub some nationalization in their face. A simple spritz and you can watch them flee with all their wealth to the nearest capitalist nation. Smile happily on the ruins of your economy as your skilled workers flee to the nearest competitive market! Nationalization from the makers of "We're edgy teenagers" and "Fuck Mixed Economies, we need more dead people."

And for a limited time, before we too are nationalized, buy one nationalization and get Secret Police. All your workers fleeing to the border? Use your secret police to root them out. Capitalist upstarts challenging your regime, arrest them and have them executed for treason.

Warning: If your taking liberty and stable growth, nationalization may cause serious complication. Consult your IMF immediately, if you have economic collapse resulting from nationalization for longer than two decades. In some rare cases, nationalization may cause starvation, genocide, and dictatorship. Ask your people, if nationalization is right for you. Even if they say no, force it down their throat.

[Kelinfort]

Jeez Ost, blame all equal pay lawsuits and all societal ills on feminism.

[Infected Mushroom]

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?

these problems will all go away when robots and technology solves everything and the world sunbathes in unlimited resources, unlimited leisure time, and the obsolesce of work, money, and competition...

can't wait.

Until then, I guess people will make whatever arguments they can (latching on to whatever ideology benefits them)to get as much as they can out of this cutthroat, competitive, selfish, survivalist society. Its a bit disingenuous but that's capitalism.

[Alyakia]

i'm pretty sure it's ok to edit peoples posts if you make it clear it's been edited. (it has, incase you didn't notice) so in that light i couldn't help but try and help you with your OP. turn it into a nice good OP instead of immediately projecting eternal hatred of feminism and throwing up 50 strawmen because hey it's ASDA we can afford the straw. i'll try and leave in some of your quips though, preserve the original as much as possible.

Ah jeez, l 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 a pay rise? Yeh probably. But so should the warehouse workers.
(Some of whom, shocker, are women.)

What do you think NSG?

that wasn't so hard, was it? you could probably be right with good frequency (about, for example, working a till and working a warehouse being quite literally not the same job) if you could just refrain from this.

that said it would be a pretty interesting debate as to whether they are equally essential or not. which in the end wouldn't matter because they are different in what is actually required.

[Gravlen]

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.

Equal pay for equal work with a comparator doing work that is:

- The same, or broadly similar (known as like work).
- Different, but which is rated under the same job evaluation scheme as equivalent to hers (known as work rated as equivalent).
- Different, but of equal value in terms of demands such as effort, skill and decision-making (known as work of equal value).

...as the Equality and Human Rights Commission would say.

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.

What?

Is it a more valuable job? That's the issue at hand.

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.

Source for this claim? Because that's not what the article says.

See? Feminism helps men after all! You just have to give up your principles first.

Which principles do you imagine are given up here?

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

What do you think NSG?

I think you haven't thought things through. I don't see the controversy here, really. It's all a question of how valuable the work they do is, and I don't have a problem with the suit itself. Even if only men where the beneficiaries of an increase in wages for the people working in retail, it would be fair as long as the work they do have equal value.

[Susurruses]

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.

Equal pay for equal work with a comparator doing work that is:

- The same, or broadly similar (known as like work).
- Different, but which is rated under the same job evaluation scheme as equivalent to hers (known as work rated as equivalent).
- Different, but of equal value in terms of demands such as effort, skill and decision-making (known as work of equal value).

...as the Equality and Human Rights Commission would say.

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.

What?

Is it a more valuable job? That's the issue at hand.

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.

Source for this claim? Because that's not what the article says.

See? Feminism helps men after all! You just have to give up your principles first.

Which principles do you imagine are given up here?

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

What do you think NSG?

I think you haven't thought things through. I don't see the controversy here, really. It's all a question of how valuable the work they do is, and I don't have a problem with the suit itself. Even if only men where the beneficiaries of an increase in wages for the people working in retail, it would be fair as long as the work they do have equal value.

Everybody go home, this thread just got nailed harder than something targeted by a tungsten rod dropped from orbit.

[Southern Hampshire]

Not in the UK.

Nadkor cites a case happening in Belfast with just this... and that's very much the UK.

Britain has five COMPLETELY different legal systems. It is very unique and only of it's kind in the world (bar China with three)
England and Wales (which is where this case was made, and which is where this case is not possible to sue if they fired you after
Scotland (different punishment system)
Northern Ireland (different law system)
Cayman Islands (completely different law and financial system)
Overseas Territories (different law and punishment system)

Belfast is, the last time I looked on a map, in Northern Ireland. (Don't know if this is possible, though. Certainly not in E/W.)

[WestRedMaple]

If you read the article, you will see that the difference in pay is as much as £4/hour. In a 48 hour working week that's just under £10,000 per year.

The UK minimum wage for employees over the age of 21 is £6.50/hour. We can safely assume that Asda is paying at or only slightly above minimum wage. Let's be generous and say that those working on the floor are paid £7/hour. In a 48 hour week that's £17,472 per year.

Those working in the warehouse could, with an extra £4/hour, be making £27,456. Floor workers would make 63p for every £1 earned in the warehouse.

Is anyone here seriously arguing that the difference in value between the work done in the warehouse and the work done on the shop floor is so great as to warrant such a disparity in pay?

Seriously?

Value is set by the people engaging in the transaction. Both wages fall within the range of what the parties to the transactions find acceptable.

[Nadkor]

If you read the article, you will see that the difference in pay is as much as £4/hour. In a 48 hour working week that's just under £10,000 per year.

The UK minimum wage for employees over the age of 21 is £6.50/hour. We can safely assume that Asda is paying at or only slightly above minimum wage. Let's be generous and say that those working on the floor are paid £7/hour. In a 48 hour week that's £17,472 per year.

Those working in the warehouse could, with an extra £4/hour, be making £27,456. Floor workers would make 63p for every £1 earned in the warehouse.

Is anyone here seriously arguing that the difference in value between the work done in the warehouse and the work done on the shop floor is so great as to warrant such a disparity in pay?

Seriously?

Value is set by the people engaging in the transaction. Both wages fall within the range of what the parties to the transactions find acceptable.

Yes, that's certainly reflected in the fact that one of the 'parties to the transaction' is taking the other to a tribunal in search of higher pay.

Well done.

[WestRedMaple]

Value is set by the people engaging in the transaction. Both wages fall within the range of what the parties to the transactions find acceptable.

Yes, that's certainly reflected in the fact that one of the 'parties to the transaction' is taking the other to a tribunal in search of higher pay.

Well done.

It should come as no surprise that few people set an UPPER limit on what they're willing to be paid.

[Trotskylvania]

It depends. In a warehouse, if you're lifting anything more than one box at a time, you've probably got them out on a pallet and you're lifting them with a forklift.

True. Then again, operating a forklift requires a specific licence iirc, plus a warehouse is more dangerous and less comfortable as a workplace than the inside of a retail store.

Any retail store is essentially a warehouse that permits the customer to have access to it.

Floor workers must do all of the same kinds of work as warehouse workers (forklift rating is quite trivial as far as job certification goes), and they must also interact with and provide customer service, and deal with all of the abuse that comes with it.

If anything, because of the higher stress environment and the additional job duties required of floor workers, they should be getting paid more than warehouse workers.

[Maqo]

I don't really understand why this is a gender issue?
Job A has male and female employees, and both are paid the same.
Job B has male and female employees, and both are paid the same.
Job A gets paid differently to Job B.

Why does the company in question have to prove that (for whatever reason) they need to pay people in Job B more than in Job A? Why does some external regulator have the authority in this situation to control the way that the company reasonably assesses the value of their employees? Even if employees in job A feel that they are undervalued, why are they exploiting gender-equality laws to get their way when it is not a gender-related issue?

At the core of it: If the jobs really were equally demanding and skilled labour, then the company would be paying them both at the lower rate because profit. If they feel the need to pay more for Job B, there is probably a reason for that.

I think discussions of whether retail vs warehouse is more difficult are completely useless. I've been in retail environments where employees just watch customers use automated checkouts while warehouse employees do back-breaking lifting; and I've seen retail where employees are run off their feet selling and upselling while the warehouse employees watch over robots.

[Condunum]

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.

Hmm... My experience is quite the opposite. Although I prefer warehouse work, it's much harder than retail work. When I was on the floor in food lion it was a pretty relaxed job. When I was in the Warehouse for Mars inc., the work was rough and breaks were union 30 and bathroom. But hell, the pay was worth it.

I'd say retail in general needs to see wages increase, but so does most job areas.