That Last Equal Opportunities Commission Report

And aren't we all indeed thankful that it is the last. These people don't seem to be able to think.

Women who work full-time earn, on average, 17% less per hour than men working full-time. For women who work part-time, the gap in pay relative to full-time men is a huge 38% per hour.

True. In the talking points:

The average woman working full time is still paid 17% less.
For part-time workers the pay gap is 38% less per hour.

Untrue. You can see how poor journalists get confused, can't you, when the EOC themselves perpetuate such nonsense.

Female part time workers get paid 38% less per hour than full time male workers. Not, as that second implies, 38% less than male part time workers. It's a deliberate distortion to make the problem look larger than it is. When I first saw these numbers, way back when, I phoned the EOC to find out what they were doing. I was told that "comparing male part time wages with female part time wages was not comparing like with like". Liars.

The causes of the pay gap are complex – in part to do with discrimination; in part because women are more likely than men to work in low paid sectors; and in part because women often have to ‘trade down’ or face other work and pay penalties once they become mothers.

Quite. That latter being the major cause.

The average woman working full-time could lose out on £330,000 over the course of her working life. These aren’t figures from the 1970s before equal pay laws came into force – they’re current and show the shocking income gap that persists between men and women. The problem affects us throughout our lives because lower pay means that women face a pensions gap too – their retirement income is 40% less than men’s.

Cretinous stupidity. Of course those women currently getting a pension are showing the effects of the 1970s, before equal pay laws came into force. They're friggin' pensioners for the Lord's sake: they started their working lives 40 and more years ago!

Until we close these glaring income gaps and fundamentally change Britain’s workplaces, our choices will remain limited.

JC on a bike: the income gap is because of the choices that people make: to have children, to care for them, the jobs that are chosen, the flexible hours and so on. It's precisely because people have choices that there is a gap!

Some desires:

Having children does not mean economic inequality for women

What? That choices don't have consequences? That in the choice between whether to perpetuate your own genes or not there should be no costs?

Women are found in as wide a range of jobs as men and no jobs are overwhelmingly done just by women or just by men

Why? If there is something innate in a job that suits one sex or another, why shouldn't it predominantly be done by that sex? Perhaps digging ditches is something innately suited to the male physique. Perhaps computer coding is innately suited to the systemizing abilities of the male type brain? Perhaps nursing is best suited to the empathic qualities of the female?

(Worth pointing out here that this not a reference to sex per se. The idea is from Simon Baron Cohen (yes, he of the autism research), that there is a continuum of brain types, from intensely systemizing to empathic. He labels these "male" and "female". It is not true that all men are male brained, nor that all women are female: it's a probability, no more. 17% of each sex have the other and more women than men have the "balanced" type in the middle. But the important point is that we should not be looking for equal numbers of each sex in a particular occupation. Rather, we should be ensuring that all of those suitably equipped for a specific profession, whatever their sex, have the opportunity to practise that profession.)

More than 8 out of 10 of us believe it’s hard for parents and carers to balance work and family life.

At least here things are getting ever better. The century long decline in working hours continues apace: we all have ever more time to devote to our families, if that is indeed what we wish to do.

Something else they want to see:

That gender-based violence is no longer considered acceptable

Anybody currently think it is? Anyone? Bueller?

an increase in the proportion of reported rapes that are successfully prosecuted

What? You mean that if there isn't enough evidence, a few more people should still be locked up in order to show our committment to gender equality?

In today’s workplace requesting flexible working can still spell career death for many women. Instead they often have to ‘trade down’ when they take on caring roles and then lose out on the top jobs.

True. It's that pesky choice thing again, isn't it?

Anyway, there it is, the last report from the EOC. Thank the Lord for that and good riddance to bad rubbish.