"Irresponsible policy" Schleswig's pay equality law leads to even more frustration

The salaries of Family and Women's Minister Manuela Schwesig and her boss, Chancellor Angela Merkel, are accessible to everyone. The salaries of their male ministerial colleagues are also known. There is complete transparency in this regard. While everyone is aware of the salaries of elected officials and civil servants, do the assistants and secretaries in public administration offices know what their male colleagues earn? And what about offices, production, and warehouse staff in private sector companies? In order to promote more wage equality in the private sector, Minister Schwesig has now introduced the draft of the so-called Pay Equality Act to the cabinet and onto the parliamentary path. Her aim is for equal or comparable work to be equally compensated. In line with the SPD's main motif for the upcoming federal election campaign, the Minister wants to establish more social justice through company procedures for reviewing and ensuring pay equality. Private employers with more than 500 employees should regularly review their pay structures regarding pay equality. Through a procedure certified by the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, companies should conduct a comprehensive analysis of their pay regulations and report in detail on their results and women's promotion. Employees should also have an individual right to information about their colleagues' salaries. Furthermore, employers with more than 200 employees should be required to explain, upon request, the criteria used for remuneration in their companies. Participation rights should be expanded, and job postings should include information on minimum wages. Last but not least, confidentiality agreements regarding salary should no longer be valid. The culture within companies is expected to change. Indeed, many employees are unequally compensated. According to Schwesig's assessment, the gender pay gap in Germany is estimated to be 21%, affecting 14 million employees. However, this is an "unadjusted" figure, as it includes part-time and partial retirement work, marginal employment, apprenticeship and internship remuneration. The Federal Statistical Office can only calculate an "adjusted Gender Pay Gap" every four years due to the abundance of data to be collected. The gap was last reported at 7%. However, factors such as career interruptions are not yet taken into account. The data and factual basis are diffuse and the bill also has several conceptual flaws. Furthermore, the causes of wage differences are not solely due to the difference between men and women and discrimination based on gender. Different career choices, family-related breaks in employment, and subsequent continuation of careers in part-time work are also significant factors. The fact that women more often take on family and childcare responsibilities than men naturally affects their retirement benefits. With her law for more wage equality, the Minister aims to build on the introduction of the quota for women on supervisory boards of large companies. The goal is gender equality. Schwesig wants employees to be able to check for themselves at any time whether they are being fairly compensated. The reporting requirement, right to information, and review process are also intended to change the culture within companies. Freedom of contract and data protection bid farewell This hits the nail on the head. The law will not only entail immense bureaucratic effort but also lead to more envy and discord. This is fueled by a massive encroachment on freedom of contract and data protection. Until now, as in the case of the "Collective Wage Agreement" (ERA) agreed upon by the metal employers and the IG Metall trade union within the constitutionally protected collective bargaining autonomy at the beginning of the century, it was the responsibility of the collective bargaining parties to standardize the remuneration of workers and employees and thus achieve greater wage justice. With ERA, the collective bargaining partners come together and jointly agree on criteria for evaluating individual tasks. Equality ideology versus justice The compulsive attempt to achieve wage equality according to Schwesig's bill is different. Contrary to the promises of politics to reduce bureaucracy and relieve companies, it is now a new task of the state to define the criteria for the "equivalence" of activities in companies and, in a way, also review collective agreements. The Pay Equality Act is based on the ideology that all people are endowed with equal abilities and work and responsibility equally. However, justice is always about justice to the matter and the individuals. People are individually talented, have different backgrounds, and bring different work attitudes. Moreover, the Minister does not seem to trust the employees to have backbone and independence. The law promotes a new culture of patronizing and paternalism. If all agreements regarding remuneration, including allowances and bonuses, are disclosed and questioned by colleagues, data protection becomes unnecessary. "If this had been proposed five years ago, data protectors would have taken to the barricades," mocks employer president Ingo Kramer. "Then we might as well abolish tax secrecy," says the BDA chief. Some supporters of the law think this is not a bad idea and argue that, for example, in Sweden, everyone knows each other's salaries. In the end, just frustration However, would a secretary, who is not as proficient in English as her colleague but still retains her job due to her difficult social situation or special loyalty and long-standing connection to the company, want all the details of her employment to be revealed and questioned by colleagues? "In Germany, career advancement depends on education, experience, resilience, and assertiveness, but not directly on gender," argues Kramer. Is the public sector then acting in a completely exemplary manner in line with Schwesig's intentions? Unfortunately not. Often, it is the employment conditions in the public sector that appear opaque and unfair due to various maneuvers by public employers such as so-called chain contracts, as perceived by those affected. So, how does the somewhat hypocritical state justify forcing private companies to disclose the terms of employment contracts and enforce state-mandated equal pay as supposed wage justice? The bill suggests that the issue of wage inequality and wage justice can be solved at once. However, this will only lead to more frustration and political disillusionment, says Bundestag member Carsten Linnemann, chairman of the Middle Stand and Economic Association of the CDU/CSU. Linnemann describes the bill as "misguided policy." He has just published a book that does not treat his profession gently. It is titled: "They do whatever they want - Anger, Frustration, Discomfort - Politics must improve." In the parliamentary legislative process, there is now an opportunity for MPs to act according to this maxim.