Key message = whatever is created and adopted should be regularly reviewed, as the context in which a policy exists and responds/speaks to is constantly changing (people employed, organisation position, social and economic trends, etc).
The conversation didn’t generate any magic answers, but surfaced a series of questions and prompts that there was a consensus any organisation should have regard to, when creating or reviewing a pay policy:
-
How will pay impact an organisations’ ability to recruit / retain talent, and enable recognition of people’s progression in their roles?
-
Even in a flat pay/structure, power manifests in different ways unequally.
-
Pay is not the only way in which people can be recognised and rewarded for their work: in-kind and supplementary benefits should be recognised and explored alongside direct financial payments to workers.
-
In organisations with team members in different countries, how to best reconcile the tensions of different costs/standards of living?
-
How are the justice themes of an organisation reflected in pay structures? i.e. is the basis of justice reflective of the circumstances of the people holding roles in the organisation, or is it a based on a position that the organisation holds for wider communities?
-
How far does an organisation use its pay structure as part of a deliberate choice to be seeking to influence wider systemic change?
-
How are / can pay structure options be influenced by different legal structures that the organisation has adopted?
-
There is a need for a shared mature culture internally for people to feel safe, and be able to, talk about pay, money, and their personal circumstances openly with each other (something that societies generally do not encourage people to do). And when a team grows / succession happens, this will require a revisiting of those initial internal debates: trusted relationships between people is vital.
-
Having an agreed external shared values system as an objective reference for discussions about pay can help manage relationships, and mitigate tensions, between people that might otherwise distract and delay decision making.
-
In recognition that the largest cost any person usually incurs is in relation to housing, what options might exist for organisations to deliberately form links with other bodies to mitigate housing (and other) costs people would otherwise incur? For example – a housing coop offering membership and tenancies to workers of the organisation would see them paying lesser rent, and therefore not have the same pressures on needing to earn higher pay; but there needs to be a mutuality of benefit for all the organisations in such arrangements to be able to sustain them.
For those in this break-out room with me, hopefully this captures the breadth of scope and perspectives we shared with each other, but is you were there and thing there’s something else we should add in to the above, please do add it in here.