A letter to the Editor of the Times which was published on 24th September 2007.

The constant use of the terms “director” and “manager” in reports about alleged inequalities in women and men’s pay is highly misleading (report, Sept. 21st).

Many so-called directors are not directors at all in the legal Companies Act definition, a definition which has specific legal rights and duties attached to it.  Even within a particular company, the pay range of real executive directors may cover a factor of three or more.

The title “manager” is used in an even wider range of circumstances and so salaries cover a huge range.  The practice is to pay salaries and benefits according to factors of which time in the job, experience in the company and range of responsibilities are usually the main ones.  As a result many employees have gripes about their pay but unlike women, men do not have a statutory body ready to enforce their claims on the ground of discrimination against them as a gender.

The truth is that the number of people designated “director” rather than “manager” and “manager” rather than, say, “officer”, has expanded enormously recently, especially in the public sector.  It isn’t only in the exam system that grade inflation exists.  It is absurb to build a case for the underpayment of women on the basis of such vague and variable job titles.