I loved the Tamara Phillips article in the May 2019 issue (“The Real-World Impact of Gender Pay Gaps”). In fact, in my compensation consulting in my organization, I highlight the numbers a lot with my calculations and recommend managers beef up their offers/adjustments for women when they come to me. I think it’s a big deal, coming from a single mother household and having a wife and a daughter, the most crucial thing I’m working on is letting them know how much of an equal human being they are to boys and men in the world.
I did have one small highlight in the article: Toward the end, when Tamara talks about “Using Tools to Identify Bias – Compensation,” the third bullet point states “Calculate pay increase using absolute values instead of percentages that can exacerbate previous bias.”
I was just wondering about that because, from my experience, percentages used for increases work best to avoid bias. When we give a 2% increase across the board, managers aren’t looking at which one of their employees are receiving what. However, when we offer a budgeted dollar amount for them to distribute for increases, they generally look at those they’d like to give more/less to and that’s where the bias plays in because a male manager would likely give more money to a male staff employee similar to them “unconsciously,” however, make the “conscious” reason/ basis of high performance, skillset, etc.
Other than that, I learned a lot from your article and implementing some other calculation tools into my decision support system that I use to make pay recommendations.
Senior Compensation Analyst
Rosetta Stone Inc