Equal Pay Disclosure Amendment Bill

Project discussion: Pay Equity Statistics


Equal Pay (Disclosure) Amendment Bill

Member's Bill

Explanatory Note

TBA

Equal Pay (Disclosure) Amendment Bill

The Parliament of New Zealand enacts as follows:

1. Title
This Act is the Equal Pay (Disclosure) Amendment Act 2009.

2. Commencement
This Act comes into force on the 1 April 2010.

3. Purpose
The purpose of this Act is to improve pay equity and narrow the gender-pay gap by requiring large employers to publish annual statistics on pay equity in their businesses.

4. Principal Act Amended
This Act amends the Equal Pay Act 1972.

5. New section inserted
The following new section is inserted after section 17A:

"17B. Employers to publish pay equity statistics

"(1) Every employer shall publish annually information showing:
"(a) The average remuneration of its male employees; and
"(b) The average remuneration of its female employees; and
"(c) The difference between the two, expressed as a percentage of the average male remuneration of subsection (a).
"(2) This section does not apply to an employer with fewer than 100 employees."

Simple and elegant
Ari54Ari54 1246236620|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Allows for naming and shaming of bad employers, while employers who actually have an excuse for having different averages can publish more information to tell us why, and we get to criticise them still if it's a horrible excuse. Yay!

Small suggestion:

"(c) The difference between the two, expressed as a percentage of the average male remuneration of subsection (a)."

Make this:

"(c) The difference between the two, consisting of at least the lower average clearly labeled as a percentage of the higher average."

Reply  |  Options
Unfold Simple and elegant by Ari54Ari54, 1246236620|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Re: Simple and elegant
IdiotSavantIdiotSavant 1246325612|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Not a bad idea, but that might make it potentially confusing, with some being female / male remuneration, and others the opposite. And given that the problem is almost always that female pay lags male pay, sticking it that way round gives consistency and focuses on the problem. Still, an option to consider when it comes time to push it at an MP…

And yes, making employers explain the gap was a major motivation for the UK version.

Reply  |  Options
Unfold Re: Simple and elegant by IdiotSavantIdiotSavant, 1246325612|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Re: Simple and elegant
Ari54Ari54 1246326325|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I thought it wouldn't matter so long as you were forcing them to publishing the raw averages anyway, and there seemed a certain irony in assuming the male pay was the correct rate in all cases in a bill designed to fight sexism ;)

This concept is simple enough that I'd be tempted to push it now, especially given there's a lot of political capital in it. The Greens are all billed out at the moment, so they might have to wait… I'm sure Labour would love it though.

Reply  |  Options
Unfold Re: Simple and elegant by Ari54Ari54, 1246326325|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Re: Simple and elegant
IdiotSavantIdiotSavant 1246345920|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Oh yes, I agree on the irony. OTOH, if the aim is to highlight the general problem…

I agree that it is the perfect time to push this issue. The question is whether any of the politicians think so.

Reply  |  Options
Unfold Re: Simple and elegant by IdiotSavantIdiotSavant, 1246345920|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Add a New Comment
page_revision: 2, last_edited: 1246187479|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z (%O ago)
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License