Thread: Registry to stay??

Ironically, I don't think that particular beast is all that it is made out to be...

It's been billed as 'Pay Equity' but in reality the pay equity that the unions are going for is more a case of 'Pay Equivalency' than 'Pay Equity'. By that I mean that in a lot of the occupations that have had equity agreements already reached, males in those professions were not being paid much more or in some cases any more than their equivalent female compatriots in the same occupation.

Where the issue was for some occupations, is that an equivalent occupation with a 4-year degree and only a few papers different was getting paid in some cases twice as much for what is essentially broadly similar work in the same office and for the same employer. The example I'm going to give is a specialist oncology social worker (critical role in cancer treatment support) who works alongside a psycologist who works with people undergoing cancer treatment. Both registered, both professional, but the social worker despite paying for a four-year degree was on a lot less. The pay equity levelled the playing field there somewhat (not going as far as equal pay). It was required as there was no way that they would be able to recruit people into that occupation when for a few extra papers and swapping the registration body the same person jumps ship to the other role...

The 'Pay Equity' side of it is more for the roles like caregivers and nurse aids, but again a male in those roles is not from my knowledge paid a notably higher salary (and I'd argue that the wages aren't enough as these people perform vital work).

I for one would happily give up any 'safety bonus' that a registry might provide to put more money into the pool for those occupations...