Equal pay means comparing the pay and outputs of individuals operating within a single occupational level as used by the Employment Equity Act (EEA). This is the measurement of internal equity and is determined by comparing pay to job-outputs, responsibilities, etc.
Difficulties arise with irresponsible references to the ‘apartheid wage gap’, meaning the pay difference between the Ceo and the entry-level employee.
First, this is not a valid job-costing measurement, and second, it has nothing to do with apartheid and everything to do with the measurement of differential job-worth and relative job-worth – which we have forgotten how to measure.
To illustrate the importance of these measurements, the relative job-worth of a qualified artisan is between 6 and 8 times greater than an entry-level employee. The artisan’s job is also placed 2 occupational levels higher than an entry-level employee.
During the engineering sector strike Seifsa published the existing pay rates showing that an entry-level employee earned R23.85 and the artisan R45.35. This means the artisan’s pay is only 1.9 times greater than the entry-level employee, but the job-worth is 6 to 8 times greater.
This is ridiculous. The Seifsa agreement only seeks to agree minimum rates. If these do not reflect a reasonably realistic situation there is no incentive for individuals to improve their earnings by acquiring additional skills and moving up a structure of jobs and pay that is greater than an entry-level job.
To rub salt into this wound the final agreement awarded a 10% increase to the entry-level employee and 9% to the artisan.
Artisans earn market-related rates that are more than the Seifsa minimum but there is no point in comparing entry-level employees to Ceos when they are not comparing themselves to development opportunities within their own sector.