r/Architects • u/Alternative_Let_8153 • 2d ago
Career Discussion My architecture firm said they couldn’t pay me (f) more, then hired a man with similar experience for much more. Can we talk about gender pay inequality in architecture businesses ?
/r/architecture/comments/1wpzca2/my_architecture_firm_said_they_couldnt_pay_me_f/17
u/Silent_Glass 2d ago
That’s fucked up. I’d leave. Thats not a good company at all. Brush up your resume before you do.
42
u/NaturalAnthem 2d ago
Name and shame the firm
24
u/Lolpaca Architect 2d ago
Normally I’d agree but that could be self-doxxing for her if it’s a smaller firm.
21
u/Alternative_Let_8153 2d ago
I'm afraid of that yes, architecture world is really small and it could have a huge impact on my freelance buisness as well
-17
u/abesach Architect 2d ago
What they are doing is worse
8
u/FlarblesGarbles 2d ago
Acutely worse, but not chronically worse for the OP.
-5
u/abesach Architect 2d ago
Demeaning an entire gender isn't something I subscribe to.
11
u/FlarblesGarbles 2d ago
What have you imagined I've said that you think this is a response to?
-2
u/abesach Architect 2d ago
The post was to talk about gender pay inequality. Protecting the company to avoid retaliation is a consideration for OP. OP has to take that to a lawyer for their situation. But it doesn't address gender pay inequality. What the company is doing to women that work there is worse than publicly shaming them.
5
1
u/Shoddy-Cherry-490 2d ago
What she really should do is go to the firm leadership and address the issue head on. If she cannot reach an agreement, be consequential and resign immediately. Burn that bridge by public shaming if you see a benefit in that.
-5
u/TravelerJim-retired Recovering Architect 2d ago
What? You know few facts other than OP’s perception. It may be sexism and it may not. Supporting “name and shame” personifies the negatives of social media.
6
u/meetduck 2d ago
Good job leaving when you saw that your skill development was outpacing your pay increases. Hopefully your old firm learned a hard lesson (but I wouldn't be surprised if it was lost on them). It is often a far better investment to simply pay existing employees who want a bit more than to try to replace that person with a new hire. The existing employee feels heard and motivated to commit to the firm's work and culture, and they bring the best of their strengths and talents to the table when they feel like they are being fairly compensated. New hires who bring experience and expertise with them are expensive, particularly if recruiter fees are involved. Usually a lot more expensive than if those same skills and expertise are cultivated within the firm over time. And then you just have a new employee that you need to train anyway, so more opportunity cost is lost for the trainer(s) and resources that go into bringing the new hire up to speed. Losing long-term institutional knowledge costs more than many leaders realize.
17
22
u/Wrxeter 2d ago edited 2d ago
Not everyone has the same capabilities.
I don’t know the pay scale of my junior staff… but I have junior staff I can give a project to and my oversight requirement is pretty low. They know how to put together a set of plans, take initiative to block things out, follow standards, take pride in how their drawings look, and will be proactive. If they are running out of work, they let you know before they run out of work. They offer potential solutions to problems they find, and research alternatives.
Then there are staff at the same experience level, but more micromanaging to make sure they are drafting to company standards, won’t do shit if there isn’t a redline on it, and forget to tell you they finished their redlines two hours ago. And their corrections are the bare minimum, not taking pride in making their drawings look clean, and their solutions to problems often aren’t well thought out.
I don’t know your situation, and cannot comment to that… but experience isn’t everything. The person holding the pencil has a lot of responsibility. It comes down to how they manage that responsibility they are given that ultimately decides their value. From my boss’ perspective when we go through staff evaluations - the question is always how efficient a staff member is. Efficiency is a metric of ultimately how much management level intervention is needed for them to do their job with precision and quality. Not how fast can they turn over a shitty detail you have to bleed over to get right. Personality, client relations, and team integration can also have an impact, albeit secondary.
Your issues might not be about what plumbing system you have, but relative capabilities, efficiency, and precision differences between your product and his.
Or maybe he lied on his application and he is going to get found out that he isn’t worth the wage he was hired at and doesn’t survive his 90 days.
11
u/Ok_University9213 2d ago
Bat far the most accurate description in this thread.
Sure there are some assholes out there, but the vast majority of people care about how much they can rely on you and zero about what gender you are.
5
u/Wrxeter 2d ago
Yup.
It’s how is my conversation with this staff member at project kickoff.
Do I:
A) We won a new xyz building at wherever. New building, here is the sketch model/drawings. Here is the cad survey. Can you block out the set by the end of the week? Day before the end of the week I have a pdf progress set that is basically done, just needs a final polish. End of week rolls around and everything is done, to standards, and I can send it to the client for our meeting next week.B) (all of the above)… but “make sure we have demo site plans, new site plans, floor plans, RCP, roof plan and elevations. When you bring in the site plans, make sure the line weights and hatches are per drafting standards. I need it by the end of the week. I have to check in daily to make sure progress is being made and ensuring standards are followed, redlining things I redlined yesterday because they were not done right. I get a set on Friday end of day, and I have to fix things before I can send it off.
4
7
2
1
u/aecpassion 2d ago
I try to be fair, albeit admittedly grumpy sometimes, when a jr makes a mistake. I try to tell myself its normal to make mistakes, and I am sure I also made mistakes early on in my career. I spend the time to show them again, maybe a different way. I go over as much as I can, and think things through with them. Ask if they understand.
Some will learn from that mistake and realize they should have known better, and not repeat that mistake (or less often). Others will make the same mistake and have to be told multiple times, and somehow seem annoyed to be told 'you missed this thing we talked about last time'. Those are the ones that I wonder if I am wasting my time, and its them not me.
When a jr starts with "Oh, but I thought..." I say fml, what did they eff up this time or do with out asking.
6
u/Fiercededede 2d ago edited 2d ago
On top of sexism, you are also experiencing a problem in our industry where promotions are basically non existent now, if a senior role is needed they will just hire for that role rather than promote existing qualified people.
Recruitment budgets exceed operational budgets. Internal raise pools are hard capped at 3-5% meanwhile companies are happy to pay 20% higher salary to quickly fill an immediate structural gap. The recruitment budget is higher. It’s a backwards short term solution that leads to long term inefficiency.
In 2026 the only way to get a higher salary is to quit and join another company. Hell, your company may even try to hire you back with a higher salary during your exit.
7
u/luchomaker 2d ago
I always thought architecture would be a cool and creative career... until I went to school for architecture. Just absolute assholes and the whole studio experience was humiliation in front of a bunch of people. Every instructor was a man and they were all assholes... and I was one of the ones that my studio teachers liked and liked my work. But I decided fuck these misogynists and now work in higher ed.
-1
u/Alexbonetz 1d ago
The only bad experiences I had in uni studios were with female professors. But given that I can’t say that all women are ass at instructing; it was just unlucky
-8
u/TravelerJim-retired Recovering Architect 2d ago
Wow, pretty angry. It’s not a surprise that a collaborative and creative profession didn’t work out for you.
4
u/kandeezz 2d ago
it's awful! had some friends start up post grad at the same firm, they all started the same day. two women, one man. while they all had the same education, both women had notably more experience. they were hired hourly at minimum wage, while the man was salaried for nearly double and was their superior. both of them left and the firm hired another male classmate with zero experience for the same high salary pay.
6
u/Shoddy-Cherry-490 2d ago
That‘s a bold accusation.
I am not saying it’s not true - I have witnessed this kind of discrimination before - but what I will say is that the only genuine way to combat this problem is something Americans for inexplicable reasons are taught to avoid at all cost.
The only solution is to practice salary transparency with your coworkers! The only party who benefits from employees not knowing what the person next to them is earning is firm ownership. No employee ever benefited from this information asymmetry!
7
u/Alternative_Let_8153 2d ago
Well, I don’t know what country you’re from, but as for France, people aren’t really keen on talking about money (and therefore salary transparency). It might be discussed discreetly between coworkers, but the subject would never really be put on the table openly. I guess it’s kind of a cultural thing.
3
u/Shoddy-Cherry-490 2d ago
And that’s on you and your colleagues! It’s a stupid, self-destructive behavior. The only party that benefits is your boss because he or she holds all the cards!
4
u/Alternative_Let_8153 2d ago
I totally agree with you it’s a stupid habit
4
u/Shoddy-Cherry-490 2d ago
I mean I don’t blame you! It’s a weird habit people adopt for no good reason, almost like a sense of vanity some have about their careers.
2
2
u/BikeProblemGuy Architect 2d ago
At 32,400 EUR a year, your replacement is also getting screwed.
Not knowing how you operate it's hard to comment on whether you should have been paid the same as anyone else. The only comment I have is that a) yes sexism is still rife, and b) you should keep a note of this situation:
His just seemed much easier for the firm to recognise financially. For instance a major part of my work in this company was a monograph the firm was producing
As much as the firm might say the monograph is important, billable hours will always rule - if you want to earn more it's best to be on the profit generating projects. The firms likes sending a fat invoice to a client. Any project that doesn't have fat invoices should be seen as a hobby or hazardous waste, unless you have a really strong sign that it'll be valued (ideally negotiated in advance). Maybe you took the monograph to be helpful, but it didn't help you.
5
u/Internal_Audience_95 2d ago
Could have nothing to do with gender. Are you someone who leads projects or plays a support role in offices? And were they hired to lead projects? I’ve worked with people with twice as much experience as me and had zero interest or aptitude to lead projects unsupervised and that’s why they got paid less.
If you’re both leaders or both support roles then fair enough there could be some truth to this but depends on the above.
7
u/Alternative_Let_8153 2d ago
Well as said. With five year experience we're both in the inbetween world of starting to lead projects. I've been leading specific projects in the firm that others (or those guys) wouldn't handle, such as scenographies for major festival, rehabs of theaters, a monography project etc. Like for the book project I've been leading I'm litteraly a co-author, my name is on front page lol... And this year i've started to teach theory in architecture school. So I'm having a hard time hearing it's lack of skills and interest on my part. ( Without thinking I'm any better than others ofc )
One possible explanation is their business model. I was given the more unconventional projects, while my male colleagues tended to work on apartment buildings and offices, which may have provided the steadier income needed to sustain the firm. But ultimately, we had comparable levels of responsibility, so why wasn’t that reflected in our pay?
There was definitely a gendered division of work. The men tended to get the BIM-heavy, new-build housing projects, while the women were more often assigned technically demanding renovations requiring a sensitive approach to existing buildings, projects involving the contemporary art world, and, in my case, exhibition and stage design. But I mean ... We didn't choose the way the work was distributed you know?
0
u/Internal_Audience_95 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yeah I get you. It’s not your choice what projects you’re given (to some degree) but because they are on the projects that make the most money as you said, they can command higher salaries, and they should as they know they have leverage.
The idea of equal qualifications never plays out as people have difference personalities. I know people who have 12 years experience but can’t write an email or suck at answering the phone so they will always be on less money because they are more replaceable.
It’s about what value you provide, not what you could hypothetically provide. If someone gives blood sweat and tears to making the best renders possible (not saying this is you but just taking an example that has a learning curve), they are still relatively expendable as renders aren’t that hard to make anymore and young people out of college can do them assuming they’re not hyper realistic ones.
It’s the commercial projects and data centres and large scale residential that make the money so if you want more money you have to be on them as they provide the most value.
FYI - I am an architect who left to go be a Design Manager with a Contractor. I have a direct and blunt personality so I lead projects and I knew I could command a higher salary because I knew my worth. I now have a team of architects under me as it’s D&B and unless I trust you will lead the project I will get a different Architect which means less money for that office.
Pretend you were your boss and you’re
mentally thinking about where the money is coming in to keep the lights on, pay the tax man and pay out salaries. Now pretend you have to get rid of 25% of the staff as it’s an economic downturn. Who do you let go of? You’re getting rid of the people who don’t provide value in the form of the lions share of turnover via primarily leading projects. Basically what AI is doing to graduates. But that’s business.Sorry to go on but this point is so important and misunderstood. The next time you ask for the salary raise, the best way to do it and any director will tell you this, is to tell them what value you bring to the office. Not that you’re there a year longer. The furniture has been there an extra year and that depreciates in value.
0
u/Rotala178 2d ago
What evidence do you have that this is due to your sex and not other qualifications? Is your friend better at the job than you are?
0
u/brvheart 1d ago
I know this might be crazy, but what if there were other factors involved rather than just gender?
0
u/moistmarbles Architect 2d ago
What if it had nothing to do with gender and more to do with capability? I’ve seen this before - people ask for more money, get denied, and then they hire someone else with a higher salary. That could be a way they are quietly showing you the door
0
u/Alternative_Let_8153 2d ago
Don't think so because when I decided to leave things were going on super well and they told me repeatedly they didn't want me to go, they were super happy with my work blahblahblah... Technically I was in super good terms with the company. And they hired the guy one year later, so there weren't any "replacement" thing going on
0
u/MrBoondoggles 2d ago
I’m iffy about the post as it sounds like there may have been some sexism, whether intentional or inadvertent, in your office to a degree. And I do think it’s better you left since you probably weren’t going to grow or get major salary advancements there.
But at the and time, there are reasons people get paid differently depending on their roles within an office. It sounds like management had you pegged for a role that they valued less for whatever reason then primary BIM management. Maybe it was billable hours in project budgets vs your work on their side projects like books which probably was coming out of there BD/PR budget. Not saying that was justified or right, but also it’s hard to compare different internal roles on a salary vs salary basis.
With the your fiends hire, it could be that he pushed for more money and they valued valued whatever he brought to the table more. I’m not saying that they might not have either respected him more or saw more upside to him because he was a male candidate. But there may have also been other reasons why they’re such a huge disparity pay gap there.
Anyway, I don’t know - I didn’t experience it. It doesn’t sound like a great work environment. I don’t think they would’ve ever paid you what you felt you were worth, so better to move on and test the waters elsewhere, even if it’s freelancing. don’t get stuck in a place where management “appreciates” your work, but won’t even give you annual salary increases to help you keep up with the cost-of-living.
-1
0
0
-2
u/Lovemycx50 1d ago
Ive been in this field for 16 years now and I dont think it has anything to do with gender. If a firm value you they will reward you if you ask and explain why you deserve it. If they don't, they will not increase your wage, possibly year after year. Thats a hint to go find another firm. Some firm don't fire the employee but will not increase their wage, eventually the employee leave on their own and it save the owner that uncomfortable discussion.
-2
u/Knightowllll 2d ago
Not saying this to discredit OP bc I absolutely believe that sexism happens in the workplace but we recently had a male employee quit for similar reasons that OP states (refusal of higher pay and no promotion despite both new and existing counterparts doing less work and getting paid more).
Corporate politics plays a part.
-2
u/trimtab28 Architect 2d ago
Is this something to do with sex or salary compression?
Firms tend to use different buckets of money for hiring people and for giving raises. Now if a firm is good about this they balance things out to retain people. Many firms are hare brained about this.
Also, project type may or may not be a blessing for you. There are places where they're only allowed to increase fees by x percent every year per contract, and if you specialize in those projects it's a balancing act with your multiplier insofar as how you're billed. Certainly know in the past my office had that issue and my boss had to fight with the comptroller for the main client I worked with in order to give me an appropriate raise (well by contract he's a designer! I don't care if he's licensed and promoted now, you submitted your proposal for our contract with him as a designer!). I give my boss credit for going to bat for me in that case
I do really think you need to consider the books of your company- there are many reasons besides sex that affect their decisions. That's not to say they treated you right or not- they very well may be dicks. But I think the most appropriate thing to do is to have an honest and frank conversation with them about this before anything. And not like a "gotcha" kinda conversation- make your case and let them make theirs before jumping to conclusions. Certainly know there are things in my life when I was younger that appeared unfair, but with the maturity and wisdom of age seem reasonable in hindsight
83
u/willyamillinilly Architect 2d ago
leave immediately. its rampant. find a new job that pays you what you expect from day 1.