The claimants, female police officers, complained that male officers had received priority payments where they had received none. The defendant said that the payments were justified in achieving a proper aim, namely the encouragement of night working.
Held: The claimants’ appeal failed. The distinction was as to payments made to reward 24/7 working. This was a legitimate purpose. More male officers were ready to work such shifts than female officers. If the legitimate aim was to reward 24/7 working, it was difficult to see how that objective would be furthered if those who do not work 24/7 were also paid the same amount.
Scott Baker LJ, Maurice Kay LJ, Wilson LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1208, [2009] IRLR 135
Bailii
Equal Pay Act 1970 1, Police Regulations 2003 34
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – West Midlands Police v Blackburn and Another EAT 11-Dec-2007
EAT Equal Pay Act – Material factor defence
The claimant police officers received less than their male comparator doing like work. The reason was that he worked shifts involving night work and received a . .
Cited – Rainey v Greater Glasgow Health Board HL 27-Nov-1986
The House considered the scope of the ‘genuine material factor’ defence in section 1(3) of the Act where prima facie indirect discrimination exists and objective justification needs to be established.
Held: The House adopted the approach of . .
Cited – Autologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .
Cited – Bilka-Kaufhaus v Webers Von Hartz ECJ 13-May-1986
ECJ An occupational pension scheme which, although established in accordance with statutory provisions, is based on an agreement between the employer and employee representatives constitutes an integral part of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Police, Discrimination
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.277563