Anthony Jarrett has worked for Public Interest Research Centre (PIRC), a Wales-based charity where he oversees finance, governance, and IT, since 2009. Despite his 30 years of experience, he is the lowest-paid member of staff at PIRC.
This is due to PIRC’s “socially just pay policy,” which aims to recognize different needs and backgrounds. Every employee receives the same core salary, with additional “uplifts” available for those with financial dependents or living in cities (as staff can now work remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic). PIRC also offers uplifts to staff who have faced marginalization, discrimination, or oppression, without requiring them to disclose specific details. Financial assistance is also provided for housing or health care emergencies.
As reported by Reasons to be Cheerful, PIRC is part of a growing number of organizations challenging traditional approaches to employee compensation. Implementing such changes necessitates a high level of trust, patience, and commitment from all parties involved. However, many advocates for a more equitable society view it as a logical progression, and mainstream employers may soon follow suit.
Reversed Norms
While every worker at PIRC received the same salary for many years, the charity’s flat pay structure no longer felt appropriate as issues of racial, gender, and other inequalities became more prominent.
The new policy, introduced in 2022, has completely reversed gender pay norms, according to Jarrett. He is content with this change as long as his pay does not decrease; in fact, it has increased gradually as the charity has raised core rates. Additionally, he receives a small uplift due to having a young daughter.
PIRC initially intended to recognize experience but was cautious about creating significant age disparities. Under the initial plans, Jarrett, as a “straight, white male” without existing marginalization, would have been the highest-paid employee by a significant margin. This outcome was contrary to the policy’s intentions, leading to a reduction in his uplift to just one percent annually, capped after five years.
PIRC’s policy is modeled after one used by another charity, Platform, but with simplifications. Rather than calculating reductions for employees with inherited wealth, PIRC expects that they would decline any available increments. The goal is to uplift rather than penalize individuals.
With only six current staff members, PIRC’s policy is still being tested. It does not yet address disability justice, and certain elements may be revisited in the future. Jarrett faces a challenge when budgeting for a new position, as a candidate’s pay could vary significantly based on factors like living in London, having children, or experiencing marginalization.
In Jarrett’s view, the policy has benefitted individuals and sent a strong signal to potential employees, likely contributing to a more diverse workforce. Previously, applicants tended to be middle-class graduates, but this trend has shifted as more individuals with experiences of marginalization are now applying for positions.
Happiness
Greaterthan, a collective of independent facilitators, consultants, coaches, and others, adopts an unconventional approach to pay. At the conclusion of a joint project, fees are not distributed solely based on hours worked or value produced.
Instead, they utilize the “Happy Money Story” method, derived from an idea originated by coach Charles Davies. The process involves individuals sharing reflections on the project, contributions, and needs, followed by independently proposing how to split the money. Discussion and agreement occur until a fair distribution is reached that satisfies everyone involved.
This method may last several meetings or just 10 minutes, depending on the participants’ familiarity with the process. Considerations include personal needs, temporary upheavals, or differing experiences during the project. The method fosters healthy team relationships and ensures fair compensation for all parties involved.
