Day 180 - 31 Oct 95 - Page 34
1 definition of 'low pay' is the decency threshold set at
2 68 per cent of average earnings in any affiliated
3 country"?
4 A. Yes, it does, my Lord; and in my most recent statement
5 of 1st March, 1995, it must be -----
6
7 MR. MORRIS: Can you face this way, Mr. Pearson?
8 A. I am sorry. Yes, it does. They are inter-connected,
9 these definitions of low pay; and in my statement of
10 March 1995, paragraph 21, what I try to do is to pull
11 together the various definitions of low pay which I think,
12 which I believe, are relevant to the matters under
13 consideration here.
14
15 Q. What is your own expert opinion on where low pay starts?
16 A. Where low pay starts? The book Twilight Robbery,
17 written in 1985, refers to definitions that were in the
18 public policy arena around about that time, 1984. The TUC
19 then in 1984 set itself a minimum wage target, as defined
20 in that extract, two-thirds of the average male earnings.
21 Why male, men in manual jobs? Because men earn more than
22 women.
23
24 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, I am not sure this has any relevance to
25 this case. There is no evidence that women at McDonald's
26 earn any less than men do.
27
28 MR. MORRIS: Of course it is relevant, because it is relevant
29 to establishing a yardstick.
30
31 THE WITNESS: No, I was not, my Lord, trying to say anything
32 about McDonald's earnings specifically in this definition.
33 I am trying to define, explain the target, and then to
34 relate it to the Council of Europe issue.
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. Carry on with that if it is ---
37 A. So, I mean, very briefly, if I may -----
38
39 Q. -- by way of explanation.
40 A. Thank you. Just very briefly: male, because male
41 earnings are substantially higher than women's; the male
42 target was used. Two-thirds of the average, because that
43 was seen to be a reasonable low paid target and thrown into
44 the public policy debate by the TUC 1984.
45
46 Q. Just pause there. (Pause) How was the two-thirds
47 reached? I mean, you just tell me how two-thirds was
48 reached; and then, at some stage, I would like you to
49 explain the 68 per cent. I realise 68 per cent is just
50 above two-thirds, if one takes two-thirds to be 67 to the
51 nearest one per cent.
52 A. The TUC -- why two-thirds?
53
54 Q. Yes.
55 A. It recognises -- the TUC target at that time recognised
56 wage differentials, that there would inevitably be, based
57 on skill and qualification and other factors, a spread of
58 earnings, around an average. The TUC target is therefore
59 not to dictate that everyone should be on the same wage,
60 but that, around the average, there should be a fair
