"Like many other organisations, our gap is a result of having a lower percentage of females in senior, higher paid roles. We are committed to reducing and eventually eliminating this gap over the coming years."
Too bad the US will never see information like this.
https://www.ibm.com/multimedia/portal/O500354G72566P94/IBM_UK_Gender_Pay_Gap_Final_Results.pdf
The US numbers do not support this theory, at junior levels women are actually paid more than men. The gap emerges after child bearing years - that's the part that needs to be addressed. Also, it'd be helpful if women were to start marrying younger partners, in such a case it'd be easier for the partner to stop working so the women can continue with her career. Most families make disciplined and careful economic decisions, one of the partners will stay home to raise children, typically whoever makes less stays home - if on average women marry 4.5 year older partners, it'd always be difficult for them to have higher income based purely on tenure and salary increases that 4.5 years bring.
I would really like to understand how someone can say that women get paid 16% less that men especially at IBM which has band levels with salary ranges that are so large (wide)? For example, band 9 runs anywhere from $110k to $210k and you have people (both men and women) all over the range.
This thing of saying that women get paid less is absolute BS. I would love to see someone produce some documents showing it.
This is certainly buried in the IBM online vault. Women get 16% less pay than men over in the UK, across the board. And there is one woman for every four men. Rest assured, they're on the case though! Committed to it!
Years are always coming