“I think it is very hard to justify these sorts of pay increases,” Hargreaves said.
“When you think the average pay is going up 1% or 2%, it’s not even meeting price rises. These pay packages have become so complex that executives don’t even understand it themselves. We have got a closed shop here and someone needs to break it open.”
The prime minister indicated some sympathy with this view, and went further by saying that increasing the number of women in boardrooms would help drive down pay levels.
“At the moment I think there is too much of a closed circle of people made available to be non-executives. By opening this up, by increasing the number of women in our boards – I think that would have a beneficial effect.”
If we hold as true the assertions that;-
- Most boards are closed environments
- These environments are dominated by men
- Women work for less pay
- Introducing women to these environments would save money
It follows that David Cameron percieves that sexual discrimination is commonplace in the UK (despite being illegal).
It also follows that he has not acted upon this, despite being elected to do so.
As routine sexual discrimination is tolerated in the UK, it also follows that any company would be able to hire women only.
Following the last point, this company would gain a financial advantage over competitors due to less spending on wages.
It futher follows that David Cameron would favour being replaced by a woman, as this would add value to British civil service in the form of saved money.
Anyone see any holes in this logic..?
Think carefully now – if you are in the UK, you are paying David Cameron £142,000 Per Annum for it.