Court in equal pay case rules in favour of Tesco employees

-

The European Court of Justice has ruled that pay for staff on the shop floor can be compared to remuneration received by employees working in the distribution centres.

This next step in the case can be compared to that of Asda’s recent case where the Supreme Court ruled that shop-floor staff and distribution centres workers were comparable.

This legal action was first brought against Tesco in 2018 as estimates reveal that around 25,000 female employees were underpaid and therefore could be liable for compensation due to a breach of the Equality Act 2010.

Tesco Action Group claim that female store workers were paid up to £3 less per hour than employees who worked in the warehouse and distribution centre, most of these employees being men.

HRreview Logo

Get our essential weekday HR news and updates.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Keep up with the latest in HR...
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
Optin_date
This field is hidden when viewing the form

 

A study carried out by Tesco in 2014 concluded that these employees should have been paid the same rate, regardless of gender, as the 22 store roles were equal to distribution centre roles.

In this most recent development of the case, the court stated that EU rules which guaranteed equal pay for men and women could be utilised in this dispute.

However, Tesco and Leigh Day (the law firm representing Tesco workers) have asked the Court for further clarification regarding the “single source” aspect of the law.

This is due to the slight difference between UK and EU law. Domestic legislation indicates that employees have to prove that they are in the “same employment” as their comparator – as Asda workers successfully proved.

However, EU law states that a worker can be compared with somebody working in a different establishment if a “single source” has the power to correct the difference in pay.

Kiran Dauka, Partner in the Employment team at Leigh Day, said that this has been proven by the CJEU’s ruling:

This judgement reinforces the Supreme Court’s ruling that the roles of shop floor workers can be compared to those of their colleagues in distribution centres for the purposes of equal pay.

For a long time, employers have argued that UK law in this area is unclear, but this judgment is simple: if there is a single body responsible for ensuring equality, the roles are comparable.

Clarification from the CJEU confirms that this single source test can be relied upon by people in the UK bringing an equal value claim. This means that employers can no longer hide behind the grey areas of UK law.

However, Tesco have refuted this, maintaining their stance that the shop-floor and distribution centre roles are different:

The jobs in our stores and distribution centres are different. These roles require different skills and demands which lead to variations in pay – but this has absolutely nothing to do with gender.

We reward our colleagues fairly for the jobs they do and work hard to ensure that the pay and benefits we offer are fair, competitive and sustainable.

These claims are extremely complex and will take many years to reach a conclusion. We continue to strongly defend these claims.

Monica Sharma is an English Literature graduate from the University of Warwick. As Editor for HRreview, her particular interests in HR include issues concerning diversity, employment law and wellbeing in the workplace. Alongside this, she has written for student publications in both England and Canada. Monica has also presented her academic work concerning the relationship between legal systems, sexual harassment and racism at a university conference at the University of Western Ontario, Canada.

Latest news

Personalising the Benefits Experience: Why Employees Need More Than Just Information

This article explores how organisations can move beyond passive, one-size-fits-all communication to deliver relevant, timely, and simplified benefits experiences that reflect employee needs and life stages.

Grant Wyatt: When the love dies – when staying is riskier than quitting

When people fall out of love with their employer, or feel their employer has fallen out of love with them, what follows is rarely a clean exit.

£30bn pension savings window opens for employers ahead of 2029 reforms

UK employers could unlock billions in National Insurance savings by expanding pension salary sacrifice schemes before new limits take effect in 2029.

Expat jobs ‘fail early as costs hit $79,000 per worker’

International assignments are ending early due to family strain, isolation and poor preparation, as rising costs increase pressure on employers.
- Advertisement -

The Great Employer Divide: What the evidence shows about employers that back parents and carers — and those that don’t

Understand the growing divide between organisations that effectively support working parents and carers — and those that don’t. This session shows how to turn employee experience data into a clear business case, linking care-related pressures to performance, retention and workforce stability.

Scott Mills exit puts spotlight on risk of ‘news vacuum’ in high-profile dismissals

Sudden departure of a long-serving BBC presenter raises questions about how employers manage high-profile dismissals and limit speculation.

Must read

How do we become conscious of our unconscious bias?

How can we prevent these predispositions from impacting our organisations and ensure we’re promoting a diverse and inclusive environment?

Gail Cohen: Making the most of gift cards as an employee reward

The gift card market has grown by more than 20 per cent.
- Advertisement -

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you