Putting parity in the pay packet

Polly Toynbee's critique of the Women and Work Commission's report on women's pay correctly suggests that the gender pay gap reflects "a far deeper structural pay disorder" and that eliminating gender pay inequality will cost taxpayers, employers and consumers more (It really won't do to blame women for Britain's pay gap, February 28).

However, she fails to propose the most direct way, at least in part, of tackling the problem. Evidence from the Low Pay Commission shows that when the minimum wage was first introduced, albeit at a very modest level, low-paid women workers were easily the main beneficiaries. A substantial increase in the national minimum wage would surely benefit low-paid female (and male) workers and begin to address the "yawning chasm between top and bottom" to which Toynbee refers.
Michael Somerton
Hull


It is depressing to see Polly Toynbee having to use the same arguments in favour of equal pay which I used when arguing with my father as a teenager 40 years ago. My father was an active trade unionist but he had a blind spot when it came to comparative pay rates.

My argument was that if we as a society valued nurses as much as car-assembly workers then they would be paid the same and that the huge disparity in their incomes reflected the fact that the overwhelming majority of nurses were female and the overwhelming majority of car-assembly workers were male. My father couldn't accept that we valued nurses less, but public affection is no substitute for a decent wage.

In urging more women to enter what are seen as "male" occupations the Women and Work Commission merely reflects the reality that we value those who fix our leaking pipes more than those who look after our elderly. The answer is not to urge women to leave those low-paid jobs but to encourage men to enter them - agitation in favour of pay parity would soon follow.
Susan Griffiths
Nottingham


There is one short, but critical piece of careers advice that all female graduates should receive. The final part of any interview is this question: "What starting salary are you looking for?"

It has been shown that women will invariably ask for less than men. A female graduate may have spent the previous 16 years excelling at school and university, but her response to this single question can undo all that. If she starts on a lower salary, she will find it very difficult to close the gap later on. What are we afraid of? Do what the men do - come up with a reasonable figure and add 20%.
Linda Russell
Lewes, E Sussex


It is not surprising that the long-awaited report by the Women and Work Commission has been attacked by equality campaigners. This is because it is misguided in helping us understand the causes of the gender pay gap. Margaret Prosser warns us that these "underlying issues" which explain the pay gap are not due to discrimination but to occupational segregation.

Women and men work in different jobs, because women work part-time and look after families. We poor, misguided women are still following traditional routes in education and training. Ergo, make girls more aware of pay and progression choices, and encourage women to broaden their skills in the labour market.

Er, did I miss the end of sexism?
Dr Reena Bhavnani
Middlesex University


The Women and Work Commission report recommends that TV soap operas and commercials introduce female characters in "scientific" roles which will encourage more schoolgirls to study maths, chemistry and physics.

In 1983 my daughter's school arranged a visit to a local Women in Science seminar. As a result she chose to take A-levels in maths, further maths, chemistry and physics, leading to a lucrative career as a chemical engineer. What happened to this scheme? It is a far more laudable and credible method of persuading girls into science-based careers than presenting "role models" on TV.
Helena Newton
Ilford, Essex