Petra Jansen· Benefits Manager, Steinbach Industrie
Posted in Pay Equity & Transparency ·
I look after rewards for the Spanish entity of a French-owned automotive supplier, about 1,250 employees in Navarre and Catalonia. We have kept a pay register and done the pay audit as part of our equality plan for some years, and each year I have the same three conversations with group headquarters.
One: the register shows means and medians by sex for each pay component, not just total pay, so the shift premium and the attendance bonus are each visible. Two: the job valuation behind it has to be agreed with the workers' representatives, so the group's global levelling cannot simply be dropped in. Three: a difference of 25% or more in any group needs a written justification.
Group colleagues assume their global dashboard covers it. It does not.
14 helpful · 11 insightful · 1 agree · 2 replies · 607 views · 3 following
Oscar JansenCEP, CBS
Benefits Manager, Copperfield Mining
Component-level visibility is the part I would recommend to everyone regardless of jurisdiction. Our total pay gap in one production category was 4%, which looked tolerable. By component it was nil on base and 31% on the night shift premium, because of who was being rostered onto nights. We would never have looked at rostering otherwise.
Compensation Consultant, Cardinal Insurance
From the headquarters side of a similar arrangement, in fairness to your group colleagues: we run 26 countries and the temptation to believe one dashboard covers everything is strong. What helped was a one-page note per country listing what the local requirement needs that the global process does not produce. Spain's ran to nine items. Could you get yours adopted as the standing brief rather than an annual argument?
