This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

"Broad brush" explanation for differential

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    Calder and another v Rowntree Mackintosh Confectionery Ltd [1993] IRLR 212 CA (0 other reports)

In Calder and another v Rowntree Mackintosh Confectionery Ltd (19 February 1993) EOR49A, the Court of Appeal upholds a finding that the employers had satisfied the defence under s.1(3) of the Equal Pay Act by showing that a differential between women twilight-shift workers and male rotating-shift workers was due to the inconvenience of being required to work rotating shifts, even though the employers had conceded that there was an element in the premium the men received which was compensation for working unsocial hours, which the women also worked.