Latest case reports added to HR & Compliance Centre
We provide a round-up of case reports added to HR & Compliance Centre this week, covering: equal pay comparators; equal pay and job evaluation schemes; time limits on equal pay claims; and redundancy consultation.
- Equal pay: A man may validly pursue a "piggy-back" equal pay claim by comparing himself with a woman who has succeeded in an equal pay claim with a higher-paid male comparator In Hartlepool Borough Council v Llewellyn and other appeals [2009] IRLR 796 EAT, the EAT confirmed that male employees may institute contingent claims relying on female comparators who have instituted equal pay claims citing other more highly paid male colleagues. The male employees may be awarded arrears of pay for the same period as their comparators. (Employment Review)
- Equal pay: Small difference in points under job evaluation scheme does not establish that jobs are of equal value In Hovell v Ashford and St Peter's Hospital NHS Trust [2009] IRLR 734 CA, the Court of Appeal held that a small difference in points between a woman's job and that of her equivalently rated comparator in a job evaluation scheme does not of itself establish that the jobs are of equal value. However, where the employee's job has been marked lower than her comparator's, an employment tribunal is not bound by law to order an independent expert's report before determining the equal value claim. This is a matter for the discretion of the tribunal. (Employment Review)
- Equal pay: Court of Appeal rules on time limits for equal pay claims in context of TUPE transfers In Gutridge and others v Sodexo Ltd and another [2009] IRLR 721 CA, the Court of Appeal held that equal pay claims in respect of employment prior to a TUPE transfer must be brought against the transferee within six months of the transfer. The six-month time limit for claims in respect of the post-transfer period does not start to run until the claimant's employment with the transferee ends. (Employment Review)
- ECJ rules on when duty to consult about redundancies should begin In Akavan Erityisalojen Keskusliitto AEK Ry and others v Fujitsu Siemens Computers Oy Case C-44/08 ECJ, the European Court of Justice held that an employer triggers the duty to consult employees about collective redundancies under the Collective Redundancies Directive (98/59/EC) when it adopts strategic decisions or changes in activities that compel it to contemplate or plan for collective redundancies. (Personnel Today)
Also
Week beginning 21 September 2009
Week beginning 7 September 2009
Week beginning 24 August 2009
Week beginning 10 August 2009
Week beginning 27 July 2009
Week beginning 20 July 2009
Week beginning 13 July 2009
Week beginning 6 July 2009
Archive: January to June 2009
Archive: July to December 2008
Archive: January to June 2008
Archive: July to December 2007
Archive: January to June 2007
Archive: July to December 2006
