|
news |
features |
students |
law firms |
practice areas |
expert witness |
events |
jobs |
subscribe |
RSS
|
|
Unequal pay strains legal floodgates
UK employers must act now to address the gender pay gap and stem the rising tide of claims, says Emma Bartlett, a partner at law firm Speechly Bircham
Equal pay is a key issue for 2008 in the United Kingdom, and is no longer restricted to the public sector. The recent rise in claims has been so significant, that the chairman of the Equality Human Rights Commission and Unison are calling for radical change in the law to inject some pace into equality legislation. Despite its introduction 30 years ago, there are still few signs of pay equality.
Claims rose from 6,607 in 2004–05 to 44,013 in 2006–07, making equal pay the second most popular claim after unfair dismissal. An even greater increase of 150,000 claims is predicted for 2007–08, and unfair dismissal claims will be dwarfed now employees know how to bring equal pay claims.
In the City of London, such claims occur as a result of low or zero-bonus awards, which may have been preceded by bullying and harassment as business pressures have tightened the visible lack of senior female bankers/executives and an unwillingness to leave the stereotypical, male, working environment behind (for example, the long-hours culture). And whether company- or sector-driven, one claim is normally the tip of the iceberg.
Causes
Causes of unequal pay that might support a genuine material factor defence – such as performance-related pay or historical reasons – will be limited by time. If tainted by sex discrimination, they will not succeed, and employers will be forced to rely on a second defence of objective justification.
Objective justification is a much harder defence. Where a material factor defence need not be fair, objective justification must be both “appropriate and necessary”. The opportunity to rely on a genuine defence will disappear if there is a suggestion that the reason is tainted by sex.
There is tension in current case law as to when objective justification is required. An anticipated decision from the Court of Appeal in two consolidated appeals, Surtees and Bainbridge, will hopefully clarify the situation. Employers will not want an outcome that supports staff relying on statistics to show indirect discrimination generally simply a decision that if the pay disparity is for a non gender-related reason, objective justification is not required. The decision is expected imminently. One adverse finding, however, could open the floodgates.
Costly claims
Equal pay claims can be expensive to defend. Legal fees are higher than average, as the claims are complex, and are generally unrecoverable. A pre-action questionnaire procedure may also be served. If the comparator is not an employee of opposite gender doing the same job, an analysis of the appropriate comparator can be difficult to find. Claimants can be awarded up to six years’ difference in unequal pay. The commercial consequences speak for themselves.
Recommendations
Avoid perpetuating the pay gap by training managers who take decisions regarding recruitment, pay or promotion on diversity issues.
Respond quickly to resolve queries or grievances regarding pay to avoid inferences of sex discrimination as well as breaching the statutory dispute resolution procedures.
Consider equal pay audits.
Reward systems should ensure that appraisals are fair so that performance is rated on an objective basis.
Adopting a positive attitude to flexible working will help lower resentment and negative perceptions of part-timers, encouraging flexible working in most levels and both genders without detriment to pay.
It used to be the case that you could be an employment lawyer without doing equal pay. But that’s no longer the case for lawyers.
This article first appeared in Personnel Today.
15-Apr-2008
Related Tags
Related News
A matter of interest
Friday, August 22, 2008
When weighing up your career options, consider throwing public interest law into the mix. Zoe Lyon speaks to three lawyers from Legal Aid NSW who have discovered the appeal.
The Aboriginal Legal Service – never a dull moment
Friday, August 22, 2008
James Jeffrey explains to Zoe Lyon why he keeps coming back to the Aboriginal Legal Service.
China Games hurdles short-term obstacle
Friday, August 22, 2008
The 2008 Games have attracted their share of negative feedback. And Beijing businesses and locals are facing inconveniences. But these needn’t be blown out to Olympic proportions, writes Kate Gibbs
It’s my party and I’ll crunch if I want to
Monday, August 18, 2008
As we face the one-year anniversary of the credit crunch, we look back at how your banking clients have fared. Kate Gibbs reports
The green agenda: who benefits?
Monday, August 18, 2008
Should lawyers and their firms be landed with environmental responsibilities as part of their profession? Kate Gibbs investigates
URS is one of the largest engineering design services firms worldwide, providing environmental and engineering expertise to businesses and communities ... [more]
