Male graduates get paid substantially more than female ones within three years of joining the private sector, a new survey by the Economic and Social Research Institute reveals.
However, overall hourly-pay rates average roughly the same for both genders, because women graduates are more likely to work in the better-paid public sector, according to the report.
The lack of an overall gender difference in graduates' hourly- pay rates contrasts sharply with the labour force as a whole, where the most recent figures suggest women are paid 15 per cent less than men.
Even so, the authors of Degrees of Equality: Gender Pay Differentials Among Recent Graduates, express surprise at finding private-sector wage variations among a group for which children - a key issue in later careers - are not yet a factor.
"Even at this early stage . . . male graduates are somewhat more likely to have been promoted by their current employer and more likely to have negotiated a salary increase due to their concentration in the private sector," the ESRI report concludes.
It also suggests that, with notable exceptions, the gender pay differential reflects the contrasting careers pursued by men and women rather than wage differences within the same jobs. Lower earnings for arts graduates affect mainly women, for example, while men are the main beneficiaries of the higher earnings among engineers.
"Perhaps the most striking difference is the marked persistence of occupational segregation by gender," the authors note. "Even within the graduate labour market, over half of female graduates are employed in predominantly female workplaces."
The report, commissioned by the equality division of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, is based on a State-wide survey of 2,000 graduates who left college in 2001 and had entered the labour market by early 2002.
By choosing a group that was overwhelmingly childless and had little variation in educational qualifications or work experience, the ESRI authors aimed to focus on other factors that led to differing pay rates, including recruitment procedures, wage structures, promotion and the existing gender composition of the workforce.
The report found that overall, female graduates earned 11 per cent less a week than male graduates, but this was largely a reflection of the shorter working hours of women, even in full-time jobs.
"The weekly hours of female full-timers are significantly lower than those of male full-timers," the ESRI document notes.
Most graduates entered the private sector; 74 per cent of males and 59 per cent of females. Among these, women earned 8.2 per cent less an hour than men. By contrast, there was no hourly-pay gap in the public sector, where graduates "earn significantly more per hour [ and per week] than those in the private sector".
Overall, men were more likely to have received employer-sponsored training in the preceding two years and were more likely to have received a promotion.
"This is due to the higher proportion of male graduates in the private sector where promotions are more common."
Men were also more likely to have received bonuses from their employers in the last 12 months: 42 per cent of male graduates had received one, compared with 32 per cent of females. This was "mainly, but not entirely" due to the higher concentration of men in the private sector. The values of bonuses paid averaged 25 per cent higher for men. While the report finds little evidence of men and women being paid different rates for the same job, it suggests men are more likely to be financially rewarded for certain academic achievements - for example, first-class honours.
In an overall conclusion, the authors say that contrary to many studies stressing the different job priorities of men and women - money versus social values, typically - "male and female graduates tend to have relatively similar attitudes to paid employment".
Each group stressed the value of having an interesting job, rather than adopting a purely materialistic attitude.
The report calls for action to address "gender segregation and organisational practices" in schools, at third level, places of employment and government. It also suggests that "formalised and transparent" pay scales and recruitment/promotion practices of the public sector may provide a model for the private sector.
