尊敬的用戶您好，這是來自FT中文網的溫馨提示：如您對更多FT中文網的內容感興趣，請在蘋果應用商店或谷歌應用市場搜尋「FT中文網」，下載FT中文網的官方應用。
Sue Gray was back in the news last weekend.
蘇•格雷(Sue Gray)上週末再次登上新聞頭條。
The former top civil servant has in fact rarely been out of the news since she unexpectedly quit to become chief of staff to Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer, last year.
自去年意外辭職，成爲工黨領袖基爾•斯塔默(Keir Starmer)爵士的幕僚長以來，這位前高級公務員實際上一直處於新聞焦點之中。
This time, the Mail on Sunday devoted nearly a whole page to the woman it called “a real-life Labour version of CJ Cregg”, the fictional White House chief of staff in The West Wing TV series.
這一次，《星期日郵報》(Mail on Sunday)幾乎用了整整一頁來報導這位被稱爲「現實版工黨的CJ Cregg」的女性，她是電視劇《白宮風雲》(The West Wing)中虛構的白宮幕僚長。
This was small beer for a person who has been accused of everything from plotting to oust Boris Johnson to spying for the British government in Northern Ireland, which she of course denies.
對於一個被指控從策劃推翻鮑里斯•強森到在北愛爾蘭爲英國政府從事間諜活動的人來說，這件事不過是小菜一碟，她當然否認了這些指控。
But for me, one of the most remarkable things about Gray is not what she has done but what she has failed to do: go to university.
但對我來說，關於格雷最引人注目的並不是她所做過的事，而是她未曾做過的事：未曾上過大學。
I still remember the jolt of hearing a former Whitehall mandarin mention this on the BBC in 2022, when Gray was a second permanent secretary in the influential Cabinet Office. That made her one of the most senior officials in the Office, ranking just below the permanent secretaries who run Whitehall departments.
我仍然記得2022年，當格雷在有影響力的內閣辦公室(Cabinet Office)擔任第二常任祕書時，一位前白廳官員在BBC上提到這一點，那時的震驚仍歷歷在目。這使她成爲內閣辦公室中最高級別的官員之一，僅次於負責管理白廳各部門的常任祕書。
For context, the number of permanent secretaries who never went to university around this time was zero, says a 2019 report by the Sutton Trust social mobility charity. Most went to one of just two universities, Oxford or Cambridge, as did most senior judges, cabinet ministers and diplomats.
根據2019年由社會流動性慈善機構薩頓信託(Sutton Trust)發佈的報告，此時期從未上過大學的常任祕書人數爲零。他們大多數人都是在牛津或劍橋這兩所大學中的一所就讀，同樣的情況也適用於大多數高級法官、內閣大臣和外交官。
For context again, the share of the general population going to Oxbridge was less than 1 per cent and just 7 per cent went to the private schools that educated most permanent secretaries, top judges and Lords.
再次提供背景，去牛津劍橋的普通人口比例不到1%，而只有7%的人去了那些培養了大多數常任祕書、高級法官和貴族的私立學校。
Education is not the only measure of class. Parents’ occupations matter too. But Gray is still an outlier in a country where a small elite still has a big say in how things are run. The Labour party she is trying to get elected has plans to smash a “class ceiling” that by some measures is a bigger problem in the UK than some comparable nations.
教育並非衡量社會階層的唯一標準，父母的職業同樣重要。但在一個少數精英依然對國家運行有重大影響的國家，格雷仍然是個例外。她所屬的工黨正在努力爭取當選，並計劃打破「階級天花板」，這在英國是一個相較於其他類似國家更嚴重的問題。
But such plans are not new. Calls for a “classless society” were made 30 years ago by then Conservative leader, John Major, the last UK prime minister who didn’t go to university.
但這樣的計劃並不新鮮。30年前，當時的保守黨領袖約翰•梅傑(John Major)曾呼籲建立一個「無階級社會」，他是英國最後一位沒有上過大學的首相。
What is new is that some employers are finally starting to address the problem. In the process, they are revealing some important things about working life in modern Britain, like the fact that class can have a bigger effect on your chance of being promoted than gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
最近，一些僱主終於開始正視這個問題。在這個過程中，他們揭示了現代英國職場生活的一些重要事實，比如階級對你晉升機會的影響可能比性別、種族或性取向更大。
The UK business of professional services firm KPMG revealed this in a groundbreaking analysis of the career paths of 16,500 of its partners and employees it published just over a year ago.
專業服務公司畢馬威(KPMG)的英國業務在一年多前發佈了一份開創性的分析，該分析涵蓋了其16500名合夥人和員工的職業發展路徑。
The firm measured class by checking what an employee’s highest earning parent did for a living, a method used by PwC, the Slaughter and May law firm and other groups tackling social class diversity.
KPMG’s data showed people from working class families took an average 19 per cent longer to shift up a grade, or as much as one year, compared to those from higher socio-economic backgrounds. Progress was even slower for working class employees who were a( female or b) had an ethnic minority background.
畢馬威的數據顯示，來自工薪階層家庭的人與來自社會經濟地位較高的人相比，平均需要多出19%的時間，也就是多達一年的時間，才能提升一個級別。對於工薪階層中的a) 女性或b) 具有少數民族背景的員工，他們的晉升速度甚至更慢。
Interestingly, the class gap reversed in KPMG’s highest reaches, where working class employees advanced faster. It’s not clear why, says Jenny Baskerville, KPMG UK’s head of inclusion, diversity and equity. But she told me these people might be “so exceptional” that, once they finally reach leadership positions, they “lean into who they are” and make their way to partner level faster.
有趣的是，在畢馬威英國的最高層，階級差距反而發生了逆轉，工人階級的員工晉升更快。畢馬威英國的包容性、多樣性和公平負責人珍妮•巴斯克維爾(Jenny Baskerville)表示，目前還不清楚原因。但她告訴我，這些人可能是「如此出色」，一旦他們最終達到領導職位，他們會「堅持自我」，從而更快地晉升到合夥人級別。
For all that, there is still a hefty UK class pay gap. One study puts it at £6,291 — or 12 per cent — for working class professionals. It is nearly three times bigger in the finance sector, which is thought to have the highest class pay gap of any profession.
Regulators have so far shied away from making social class reporting mandatory, fearing the reporting burden in a sector where few firms collect the necessary data. Experts say this needs to change when students from disadvantaged backgrounds with a first class degree from a top university are still less likely to get an elite job than more privileged students with poor second class degrees. I agree.
監管機構至今一直避免強制實施社會階層報告，因爲他們擔心在一個很少有公司收集必要數據的行業中，這將增加報告負擔。專家認爲，這種情況需要改變，因爲來自貧困背景的學生即使在頂尖大學獲得一等學位，也比獲得二等學位的富裕學生更難找到精英工作。我對此表示贊同。
Groups such as KPMG are showing that once class backgrounds are known, employers can figure out who is being affected and what can be done to make sure all talented people advance. That’s not just fair. It is also just good business.
像畢馬威這樣的集團正在展示，一旦瞭解了階級背景，僱主就能明確誰受到了影響，以及可以採取什麼措施來確保所有有才華的人都能得到提升。這不僅僅是公平的，也是明智的商業策略。