Shell reveals gender pay gap of 22%

Shell said the main reasons for the gender pay gap were because fewer women were in senior leadership roles or higher paid technical positions

Stephen Little
Thursday 30 November 2017 17:43
Comments
Shell said  there was “still some way to go” before closing the pay gap
Shell said there was “still some way to go” before closing the pay gap

Oil giant Shell has revealed that women are paid nearly a quarter less than their male colleagues.

The UK’s biggest company said that it pays its female staff on average 22 per cent less than its male employees.

The company said the two main reasons for the gender pay gap were because fewer women were employed in senior leadership roles or higher paid technical positions

Shell said that while it was confident that its staff received equal pay, there was “still some way to go” before closing the pay gap.

Sinead Lynch, chair of Shell UK, said: “Equal Pay ensures men and women are paid equally for work of equal value.

“We know it will take time and we will continue to tackle the root causes of imbalance. This includes sponsoring and engaging in STEM programmes for girls, working to eliminate any unconscious bias in our systems, processes and policies and continuing to foster a culture of inclusion at every level.”

Shell UK said it was making progress addressing gender pay gap. Between 2005 and 2017, the percentage of women employed by the firm in senior management roles in the UK has risen from 12 per cent to 26.8 per cent. At the graduate level, 47 per cent of graduate positions are now held by women.

Under legislation introduced earlier this year, all UK business with more than 250 or more employees must now publish data on the difference between how much they pay men and women.

According to the Office for National Statistics, the median gender pay gap is currently 9.1 per cent – the lowest since records began.

Last week, the Bank of England said that its male staff were paid 24 per cent more than its female employees, also citing a lack of women in senior positions as the main reason for the divide.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in