Re: Cool, cool...
No, not 90% of women at Nokia were underpaid:
"...which found 90 per cent of those affected were women"
and the objective was to "remove all unexplained or unjustified wage differences"
and lastly, "Salaries for Nokia's 103,000 staff were changed from the beginning of July"
It's a bit weird that they say that 90% of those affected were women (and there are about 20k women in Nokia), and then they say their entire workforce's salaries were updated. Seems like if *all* women at Nokia were affected, then at most 22k staff would be affected. Reading the Google-Translated version of the Finnish article (YMMV), it doesn't say at all how many staff were affected, just that 90% of them were women
Anyway, it may well be that "female tech staff member A got a pay rise because male tech staff member B was earning more for the same job at the same performance level", or it may be that "female tech staff member A got a pay rise because female staff member B was earning more for the same job at the same performance level" (and similar for male-male comparisons). No stats are provided in this article that can be used to derive some form of sexual (or other) discrimination on Nokia's part.
It also doesn't say discrimination of any form didn't happen, so I'm not saying it hasn't. Just that the Register article doesn't say anything.
Again, RTFA gives us that the pay gaps were caused by old interview practices asking for previous salaries and offering a bit more to get someone in, or from job mobility within the organisation, changing job/country and not getting a raise.
As to how staff took the message - in the UK, at least, you can't force a pay cut on anyone without their agreement, so I guess everyone got a pay rise to the highest common denominator - with HR wielding the "same job, same performance" to keep some variability...
A bit curious as to how they might factor in the duration of performance into their calculations. One might hope that a consistent underperformer who just before this exercise manages to pull their socks up for once and get into the Excellent category of performance doesn't get a good salary bump to match their colleague who was getting Excellent for the last 10 years.