Reading Borough Council v James & Ors UKEAT/0222/17/JOJ

Appeal against the way in which the Claimants' equal pay compensation was calculated with reference to 2 comparators. Appeal dismissed.

This appeal raised a short point of law concerning the temporal scope of a pay comparison in proceedings based on equal pay for work of equal value brought under the Equal Pay Act 1970. The Claimants sought arrears of pay dating back to 2002, comparing themselves with two comparators in post from that time and found to be doing work of equal value to the women. With effect from 6 April 2006 Mr Coleman was promoted to a different role; and with effect from 1 May 2011 Mr Peever's role was assimilated onto a Single Status Scheme at a lower rate of pay. There were other male highways operatives who remained employed and were available as comparators for equal pay purposes. The Respondent argued that the Claimants could not compare themselves with Mr Coleman for the purposes of calculating their arrears claims from 6 April 2006 onwards, or Mr Peever from 1 May 2011. The ET rejected those contentions; and the Claimants' losses were assessed by reference to Mr Coleman's pay from 6 April 2006, frozen as at 5 April 2006; and Mr Peever's pay at a level frozen prior to assimilation. The Respondent appealed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. There is no temporal limitation or other provision in the Equal Pay Act that restricts the continued implication of the equalised term in any way.

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2008/0024_08_3107.html

Published: 26/06/2018 09:34

message