Gender equality and the BBC Pay Gap
Friday 21st July — Blueprint discusses the data released from the BBC detailing their gender pay gap, and the issues of gender and inequality more broadly.
The UK gender pay gap currently stands at 13.9% — meaning that women get paid (on average) 13.9% less than men, for doing exactly the same job. The Fawcett Society states that the four main causes of this ‘gap’ are: discrimination, unequal caring responsibilities, a divided labour market and men holding the most senior roles.
In an attempt to close the gap, the government enforced new legislation in April of this year, requiring any company with 250 employees or more to publish figures detailing their ‘gender pay gap’ before 5th April 2018.

The BBC published its own gender pay gap data on Wednesday, albeit not in the same form as that which other companies are expected to. The corporation disclosed the salaries of its 96 ‘top earners’: classified as the people paid more than £150,000 pa. The top 7 are all white men, and only 2 women feature in the top 10. The data simultaneously revealed a ‘race gap’ as 90% of the list is white.
Many people have been outraged over this data and have called for both female and BAME employees to receive pay rises in response to the injustice and unfairness. Whilst there is an absolute need to address inequality in pay, responding in this way may not be the most appropriate course of action.
Nearly all of the people listed in that report are in the top 1% (earning more than £162k pre-tax). They are privileged enough to receive fantastic salaries which can more than cater for their needs, wants, whims and desires. No matter of how they compare to their colleagues, they are already earning more than the other 99% of the population. By encouraging these top earners to battle amongst themselves for the highest salary, it will create a ‘race to the top’ and further exacerbate the stark societal inequality already present in the UK. CEO pay is good evidence of how this can escalate quickly. In 1980, the average CEO took home 20x that of a ‘normal’ employee. Today, it stands at 149x.
An assumption in this debate, is that people are inherently self-interested and are motivated by money. Therefore, in order to get the ‘top talent’ and to encourage people to ‘perform well’ they must be incentivised by high salaries and bonuses. In fact, there is plenty of evidence to show that when treated with respect and given a purpose, people will be more driven to engage with a meaningful enterprise — rather than just seeking the highest pay packet.
Another assumption in this discussion, is that certain jobs and even certain types of people are inherently more ‘valuable’ than others. The BBC seemingly judges on-screen talent to be significantly more ‘valuable’ than those off-screen, when in fact they could be no more capable, worthy or hard-working than those who are producing, editing, casting and writing. — So why then are they paid more?
There is much to discuss in the realms of ‘fair pay’: living wages, excessively high CEO remuneration, pay ratios between the minimum and maximum… the topic is not only large and complicated, but also interconnected with so many other fundamental ideas about how we treat, value, motivate and incentivise people.
Blueprint believes that is important to draw attention to problems which need to be resolved. However, in treating the ‘gender pay gap’ as a silo and attempting to solve it in isolation of the other factors present in the societal-wide problem of fair pay — we are not going to produce the solution we desire.
Instead, we need to realise that the crux of this issue is not in that we treat men and women differently: it’s that we aren’t seeing all people as equal and worthy of the same.
