EAT EQUAL PAY ACT – Material factor defence and justification
1. The Employment Tribunal did not err in concluding that on the facts the Respondent had not persuaded it that there was no sex taint in respect of bonus and attendance allowances.
2. The ET did err in concluding that the Respondent had failed to provide objective justification in respect of on call allowances. It misidentified the legitimate aim. Had it not done so it could only have concluded that there was objective justification for the disparate impact.
3. In relation to caretakers the ET had erred in treating the Enderby and Bilka Kaufhaus approaches as mutually exclusive.
Judges:
Wilkie J
Citations:
[2012] UKEAT 0256 – 11 – 1805
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.459941
