A model letter to an employee proposing to change the method used for paying him or her.
In Cadman v Health and Safety Executive  IRLR 971 CA, the Court of Appeal referred the case to the European Court of Justice to determine whether the use of length of service as a determinant of pay is indirectly discriminatory and whether it, therefore, needs to be objectively justified.
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering verbal formation of contracts.
In Diageo plc v Thomson, the EAT holds that the test of a "valid job evaluation study" is that it must be thorough in analysis and capable of impartial application. In assessing whether that test is satisfied, tribunals should first set out the issues with reference to this test. If there are defects in the study carried out, it should determine whether, individually or collectively, they cause the evaluation to fail this test.
A table summarising what must be included in an itemised pay statement.
In Merino Gomez v Continental Industrias del Caucho SA, the European Court of Justice holds that pregnant workers have a dual entitlement to annual leave and maternity leave: pregnant workers must be able to take their annual leave during a period other than their period of maternity leave.
In Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and another v Fernandez, the EAT holds that an employer was not required objectively to justify the difference in pay between the complainant and his female comparator, in circumstances where there was no suggestion that the factors relied on by the employer in seeking to establish the "material factor" defence to the equal pay claim were indirectly discriminatory.
In Health and Safety Executive v Cadman (22 October 2003), the EAT holds that length of service as a criterion in a pay system did not require specific justification so as to establish a genuine material factor defence to an equal pay claim, as length of service was generally objectively justified.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to pay and grading systems.