E-mail this to a friend
Print this
European Court of Justice Hears Landmark Equal Pay Claim
08 March 2006
The European Court of Justice will today hear a landmark equal pay claim brought by a principal inspector of health and safety against her employer, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).
Bernadette Cadman, aged 43, who works at HSE's Manchester office, brought a claim for equal pay, arguing that seniority-based pay systems have a disproportionate impact on women. Cadman has worked for HSE for 12 years and was promoted to a band 2 inspector in 1996. On checking with Personnel, she found out that she was being paid less than the average salary of male colleagues in the same grade. The difference in pay was in the order of £5,000 to £7,000 a year.
Mrs Cadman's solicitor Emma Hawksworth, a partner at Russell Jones & Walker, said: "This is the most important equal pay claim to be brought in the last 10 years.
"The equal pay act makes pay differences between men and women doing the same job unlawful, unless the pay differential can be shown to be a result of a material difference between their cases. That material difference cannot itself be discriminatory, either directly or indirectly.
"Following an earlier European Court decision it was previously understood that length of service in a role can be a justification for increased pay, without the need to examine further whether that length of service criterion is itself discriminatory.
"The Equal Opportunities Commission has shown that in this country, and throughout the EU, that the length of service of female workers, taken as a whole, is less than that of male workers, due in large part to female workers' domestic circumstances and obligations. In Mrs Cadman's case, we argued that it was unlawful to allow for men in a comparable role to be paid more than her solely on the basis of length of service and without any need to show why that was justifiable. We are encouraged by indications in the Court of Appeal's decision that length of service pay schemes are not always self-evidently justifiable, and by the European Commission's written observations which support the position that seniority based schemes do require justification."
Paul Noon, General Secretary of Prospect, the union which has funded Mrs Cadman's claim said: "We will support Mrs Cadman's case to its final conclusion.
"While the case is particularly relevant to public services it will also be significant in any employment where long seniority-based pay scales exist, or where additional contractual benefits are dependent on long service such as enhanced holiday entitlements.
"When service-related pay is analysed women are often clustered at the lower parts of the pay band. This is because statistically women on average have shorter service, often due to children or other care responsibilities, or to the increase in women entrants to traditionally male dominated professions."
Mrs Cadman commented: "Equal pay is a vital issue for women. I am grateful for the support of my union and I am delighted that the European Court is considering my case. This case goes much wider than one person and a good result in Europe will mean that thousands of women are equally valued for the work that they do."
The Equal Opportunities Commission is also supporting Mrs Cadman's claim.