Schroders reveals 33% gender pay gap for global employees
Female employees on fixed hourly pay scales at Schroders have a median gender pay gap of 33% compared to their male counterparts, the company has said as demand for greater transparency on gender income differences increases. The average gender pay gap widened to 66% for variable pay scales, due predominantly to the absence of women in senior management positions, the company said in a report volunteered ahead of UK regulations that would make publication of such details compulsory.

Schroders has reported a mean gender pay gap of 31%, based on hourly fixed pay across its global workforce.

The global asset and wealth management organisation has a median gender pay gap of 33% based on hourly fixed pay, according to its 2016 annual report.

The mean gender pay gap for total variable pay across the organisation’s global workforce is 66%, and the median gender pay gap is 59% when based on total variable pay.

More than half (59%) of Schroders’ global employees are men. The proportion of female to male staff that received variable pay is 95% to 96%.

The gender pay gap has been attributed to the under-representation of women within senior levels of the business. The proportion of women to men in the top quartile of employees based on hourly fixed pay is 21% to 79%. Around a third (36%) of employees in the second pay quartile are female. The third pay quartile has 50% females and 50% males, and the bottom quartile has 59% females to 41% males.

Schroders has voluntarily published the gender pay gap data for its global workforce ahead of the introduction of the gender pay reporting requirements in the UK.

The current timeline for mandatory gender pay gap reporting requires employers to capture data for UK employees on 5 April 2017 and then publish findings no later than 4 April 2018, with this cycle continuing on a yearly basis. Schroders intends to publish the UK data in due course.

The regulations require organisations with 250 or more employees to publish the difference between both the mean and median hourly rate of pay for male and female full-time employees; the difference between both the mean bonus pay and median bonus pay for male and female employees; the proportions of male and female employees who were awarded bonus pay; and the proportions of male and female full-time employees in the lower, lower middle, upper middle and upper quartile pay bands.

Schroders is looking to increase female representation among senior management as part of its diversity strategy. This measure is also designed to help reduce the gender pay gap and aligns with the organisation’s commitment to the Women in Finance Charter, which asks organisations within the financial services sector to commit to increase the representation of women in senior management positions.

Originally, the financial services organisation had a target to have 30% of women in senior management roles by 2019. Between the end of 2015 and 2016, female representation increased from 25% to 29%, leading to Schroders increasing the target to 33% female representation at senior management level by the end of 2019.

The average annual bonus award per eligible employee decreased by 11% in 2016, reflecting a reduction in the annual bonus pool and a growing headcount. The group chief executive’s pay is 33 times the employee mean and 60 times the employee median pay for 2016.

Lord Howard of Penrith, chairman of the remuneration committee at Schroders, said: “As one of the first signatories of the Women in Finance Charter in the UK, we are committed to increasing the representation of women within senior management. We targeted 30% representation by 2019. Having made significant progress, moving from 25% at the end of 2015 to 29% this year, we have increased our target to 33%.

“This year we have disclosed gender pay gap data for the first time, in advance of UK disclosure rules coming into effect in April 2017. This shows a gap of 31% to 33% for salary and other cash allowances per hour and 59% to 66% for bonus, though these figures may be misleading. Our analysis of comparable roles shows that we reward men and women fairly for similar work and that the gap reflects the lower representation of women at senior levels within the organisation.”