E-mail this to a friend
Print this
"Time for Compulsory Pay Audits on all Employers" Says Leading Employment Lawyer After Report Calls for Radical Changes to Equality Law
27 April 2006
- "Report Throws Spotlight on Massive Pay Gap"
One of the UK’s leading employment lawyers has today called for a compulsory pay audit for all employers in order to address the pay gap between men and women. Arpita Dutt made her comments following the publication by the Fawcett Society of its report ‘Gender Equality in the 21st Century’ which says there are still major disparities between men and women in the workplace.
Arpita Dutt, from national law firm Russell Jones & Walker, says:
"The Fawcett Report has thrown the spotlight on the massive inequalities women face in the workplace where, despite thirty years’ worth of equality law, this country has amongst the highest pay differentials in Europe, with women working full-time earn on average 17% less per hour than men.
"We are calling on the Government to make pay audits mandatory for all private sector employers, in line with those in the public sector. Only then will we be able to genuinely eradicate the pay gap that current law has attempted, but failed, to address.
"In France companies are legally obliged to publish information on working conditions, training and pay for men and women in their annual reports.
"In Sweden, the law requires employers to publish reports on wages for men and women.
"In Denmark, all companies with more than 10 employees must publish statistics on wages broken down into men and women.
"Working at the coal face of employment law in the UK we see the consequences of pay discrimination and of the weakness of current equality law.
"We also see clients who find it emotionally and financially draining to bring cases and support the Fawcett Society’s call for the onus to be placed on employers to prevent discrimination."
The award-winning employment law team from national law firm Russell Jones & Walker leads the field in gender equality cases, and continues to run test cases to challenge current equality laws. Specialist equality solicitors from the firm are available for comment.
For interviews and comment please call press officer Andy Evans on 0788 1953 700.
Ends
Editors’ note:
1. Link to the Equal Pay section of Russell Jones & Walker’s website is
http://www.rjw.co.uk/our-expertise/49/61
2. Link to Russell Jones & Walker’s EqualityXpress service is
http://www.rjw.co.uk/our-expertise/49/equalityxpress
3. Fawcett Society report can be found at http://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk//index.asp?PageID=256
4. Fawcett Society report’s Facts and figures on women and work are:
- Women make up nearly half (46%) of the labour force in the UK
70% of women are in employment
- The gender pay gap in the UK is the worst in Europe. Women working full-time earn on average 17% less per hour than men and women working part-time earn 39% less per hour than men working full time.
- The average hourly wage for female workers prior to having children is 91% of the male average but declines to 67% for working mothers with young children.
- 30,000 pregnant women are unlawfully forced out of their jobs each year
5. Russell Jones & Walker’s current and recent test cases on equal pay include:
i. Cadman v HSE
In this notoriously complex area of law, we are currently before the European Court of Justice.
Our client received less pay than men in the same grade as her at the Health & Safety Executive, but they had been employed for longer, which was the reason they were paid more. The Court of Appeal has referred the matter to the European Court of Justice, to decide whether the use of length of service as a factor in a pay system requires objective justification.
If this case is successful, it will have a significant impact on closing pay disparities within the civil service and throughout the public and private sectors, wherever long service-based pay schemes exist.
Until now, the principle that length of service is a valid criterion in a pay system has been generally accepted. But in this case, we have demonstrated that it is a criterion which weighs disproportionately against women, who are more likely to have taken a career break than men. If the European Court of Justice rules in favour of Mrs Cadman, the claim will go before an Employment Tribunal to decide if it can objectively be justified.
ii. Sharp v Caledonia Group Services Limited
In another complex Equal Pay claim, we succeeded in persuading the Employment Appeals Tribunal to depart from a previous ruling by applying European caselaw, thereby instituting a change in the law. The EAT extended the requirement for employers to objectively justify pay differences to all equal pay claims.
Our client was employed by an established city institution but was paid significantly less than her male colleagues. While her specific role was different to other employees, the tribunal agreed that her work is of equal value.
This test case was funded by the Equal Opportunities Commission and is now proceeding to the Court of Appeal. If the case is upheld, it will ensure that tribunals can look behind the reasons put forward by employers for differences in pay to test their fairness and validity.