1 / 19

Adjusted Gender Pay Gap Item 4.3 of the draft agenda

Adjusted Gender Pay Gap Item 4.3 of the draft agenda. DSS Meeting 1 and 2 March 2018. Outline. Gender policy context The unadjusted GPG The adjusted GPG Results and analysis Outcome of the LAMAS/DSSB consultations Conclusions. Eurostat. I. GENDER POLICY CONTEXT.

hoskinsk
Download Presentation

Adjusted Gender Pay Gap Item 4.3 of the draft agenda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Adjusted Gender Pay GapItem4.3 of the draft agenda DSS Meeting1 and 2 March 2018

  2. Outline • Gender policy context • The unadjusted GPG • The adjusted GPG • Results and analysis • Outcome of the LAMAS/DSSB consultations • Conclusions Eurostat

  3. I. GENDER POLICY CONTEXT • Reducing the gender pay gap is one of the key priorities of EU gender policy • The European Commission carries out information activities and monitors progress • The unadjusted GPG (UGPG) is the lead indicator and is used to evaluate the progress in reducing the gap • The indicator was included in the Social Scoreboard of the EPSR Eurostat

  4. II. THE UNADJUSTED GPG • Published annually by Eurostat in cooperation with the NSIs • Based on the methodology and data of the Structure of Earnings Survey and national data sources • Covering NACE sections B to S without O, enterprises with 10 employees or more Eurostat

  5. II. THE UNADJUSTED GPG (in %) Eurostat

  6. TitleII. THE UNADJUSTED GPG: interpretation • As an unadjusted indicator, the GPG gives an overall picture of the difference in hourly earnings of men and women, ON AVERAGE • It measures a concept which is broader than the concept of equal pay for equal work … as it includes two parts: • possible discrimination in terms of "unequal pay for equal work" • sectoral and occupational gender segregations Eurostat

  7. TII. THE UNADJUSTED GPG: 2014 results (%) Eurostat

  8. Towards the adjusted GPG • Need to adjust GPG to correct for unequal distributions • Strong interest from DG for Justice and Consumers … • … mainly for adjustment factors but also for the adjusted values of the GPG => Eurostat developed a methodology to decompose the unadjusted GPG Eurostat

  9. III. THE ADJUSTED GPG • Oaxaca decomposition is used to estimate the adjusted GPG • Carried out in two stages: a) regression analysis b) decomposition of earnings • The male earnings constitute the non-discriminatory benchmark Eurostat

  10. III. THE ADJUSTED GPG Eurostat

  11. IV. RESULTS: Adjusted (unexplained part) GPG EU level: • The adjusted GPG for the EU28 can be calculated using the same method as for the EU unadjusted GPG • => as the average of the adjusted GPGs in EU Member States weighted by the corresponding numbers of employees • In 2014, the EU adjusted GPG was 11.5% (against 16.6%for the unadjusted GPG) • For the same average characteristics, women are expected to earn 11.5% less than men due to higher financial returns for men Eurostat

  12. IV. RESULTS: Adjusted (unexplained part) GPGNational level: Eurostat

  13. IV. RESULTS by countries: Adjusted and unadjusted GPGs (%), 2014 Eurostat

  14. IV. RESULTS – explained GPG EU level: • Explained GPG: 5.1% • unadjusted GPG (16.6%) = adjusted/unexplained GPG (11.5%) + explained GPG (5.1%) • Women are expected to earn 5.1% lessthan men due to bettercharacteristics on average of men • Mostlydriven by: • Economicactivity (5.4% gap) • Working time (2.1% gap) • Education (-1.2%) Eurostat

  15. IV. RESULTS – explained part National level: • Overall explained part is negative in 11 MSs (Better characteristics for women): Bulgaria,Croatia, Hungary, Ireland,Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovenia  Adjusted GPG higher than unadjusted • Overall explained part is positive in the other 17 MSs (Better characteristics for men)  Adjusted GPG lower than unadjusted Eurostat

  16. IV. RESULTS – explained part National level: • Positive explained GPG for economicactivity in mostMSs • Negativeexplained GPG for educationin mostMSs • Mixed picture for occupation • But generally negative when overall explained part is negative • And positive when overall explained part is positive Eurostat

  17. IV. RESULTS – decomposition of the explained part (% of male earnings)

  18. V. OUTCOME OF LAMAS/DSSB CONSULTATION • Unadjusted GPG to remain the headline indicator • A vast majority of countries supported Eurostat's proposal but some Member-States pointed at: • - other variants of the Oaxaca decomposition • - missing important explanatory variables in SES data (e.g. career breaks) • Agreement on a Eurostat publication as ‘Statistical working paper' • Further consultations required before publishing the results as experimental statistics Eurostat

  19. DSS is invited to … • Take note of the work carried out by Eurostat and of the planned Eurostat publication of the decomposition methodology and results as 'Statistical working paper' • Discuss a possible dissemination of the explained GPG (and components) as experimental statistics Eurostat

More Related