§ Lord CULLEN of ASHBOURNEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress has been made in narrowing the gap between the average weekly wages of men and women in British industry.
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, between April 1970 and April 1976 the average weekly earnings of women rose from 54.3 per cent. to 64.3 per cent. of the corresponding figure for men. During the same period the figure for the average hourly earnings of women, which excludes the effects of overtime, rose from 62.9 per cent. to 73.5 per cent. of men's hourly earnings.
§ Lord CULLEN of ASHBOURNEMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that reply, may I say that, although I realise that the percentage increases for women have risen faster than those for men, since the base figure on which average earnings are worked out is so much smaller in the case of women than in the case of men the actual cash gap appears to be widening rather than narrowing? Is the Minister aware of that?
§ Lord JACQUESNo, my Lords, the cash gap is not widening. It is true that the average earnings of men are greater than the average earnings of women, but the increase in the hourly earnings, which I think is the correct figure to take, is quite substantial.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, can the Minister therefore kindly explain why—and I will take the hourly figures because 1622 I accept that that is the right basis on which to approach this question—in October 1972 the gap was 31.32 pence as between men and women and by April 1976 it was over 40 pence? What are the Government doing about getting the real value of wages nearer as between men and women? Will the noble Lord accept that the working women of this country consider that they are being cheated under the Social Contract?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, in the first place the Government have done quite a lot. They have allowed additional payments to women outside the Social Contract, so I do not know why the noble Baroness thinks that the Social Contract is injuring women. If the noble Baroness wishes to interrupt, she may.
§ Baroness ELLESNo, my Lords. If the Minister wishes to say something I hope he will finish his statement.
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, it is quite true that we have kept the increases to women outside the Social Contract. We have taken steps to see that discrimination is completely removed from all the national agreements and wage orders on the employment register. We have taken steps to give women additional opportunities for training. I do not know what else we could have done.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, will the Minister kindly look closely at these figures because I think he will find that the cash gap is widening. As to a matter my noble friend pointed out, would the Minister concede that, once the base line is so divergent, even an enormous percentage increase does not increase the amount in a woman's pocket, and that household bills are not based on percentages but on cash?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, very substantial progress has been made. I am astonished that the noble Baroness should take this line. I hope she will notice the increase in hourly rates from 62.9 per cent. to 73.5 per cent. of the men's rate. Let me give your Lordships a standard for comparison. In the teaching profession there has been equal pay since 1961, a period of 15 years. Let us look at the results there. After 15 years the women are receiving only 78 per cent. 1623 of the earnings of men, for reasons that have nothing to do with equal pay. There are two kinds of reasons. First, the women are concentrated in the primary schools sector, which is the lower paid sector, and secondly there are family reasons. The women are not prepared to move for, say, promotion because of family reasons; they are not prepared to take minor promotions which might involve, say, some work in the evenings. So the difference in the teaching profession is very much the choice of women themselves, and I suggest that the same is true in industry generally.
§ Baroness ELLESMy Lords, I do not want to continue this "argy-bargy" across the Table but I wonder whether the Minister would look closely at the figure for April 1975, which was 174 pence per hour for fulltime non-manual men and 105 pence per hour for fulltime non-manual women; and by April 1976 it was 210 pence for men and 131 pence for women. Would he kindly look at these figures and see what can be done about the situation?
§ Lord JACQUESMy Lords, looking at figures does not do much good. What does good is taking action, and I have explained the action that the Government have taken and nobody has challenged that it is inadequate.
§ Lord HARMAR-NICHOLLSMy Lords, will the Minister—
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Peart)My Lords, I really think we should go on to the next Question.
§ Lord WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, can my noble friend explain what is a "non-manual man"?