Grading structures

New and updated

  • Implementing market-related pay at the Principality Building Society

    Date:
    4 March 2011
    Type:
    Case studies

    The Principality Building Society introduced a market- and performance-related pay and grading structure following a comprehensive job evaluation exercise. This case study looks at how this was implemented

  • Pay harmony on single status at Newcastle City Council

    Date:
    17 December 2010
    Type:
    Case studies

    It has taken a decade for an equality-proofed pay and grading structure to be negotiated and implemented at Newcastle City Council, but both the employer and union are proud of it.

  • Unison's equality-proofed pay and grading structure

    Date:
    5 October 2009
    Type:
    Case studies

    Following the creation of Unison in 1993 and the legacy of five different sets of terms and conditions, the union set about equality-proofing its pay structure for staff, and harmonising terms and conditions. This case study charts the obstacles that were overcome and details the new pay structure.

  • Flawed grading system no defence in equal pay claim

    Date:
    1 July 2002
    Type:
    Law reports

    In an equal pay case brought by a female cleaner, an employment tribunal has rejected the employer's claim that its grading system justified a pay differential, saying it found no objective justification for the different grading.

  • Doubt cast on service payments

    Date:
    1 July 1991
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Nimz v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg (7 February 1991) EOR38A, the European Court of Justice holds that where using service as a pay criterion has a disparate impact upon women, the employer must justify it by showing a relationship between the nature of the work performed and the experience gained by performing the work.

  • Grading error no defence

    Date:
    1 May 1991
    Type:
    Law reports

    In McPherson v Rathgael Centre for Children and Young People and Northern Ireland Office (Training Schools Branch) (5 December 1990) EOR37A, the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal rules that it is not a defence to an equal pay claim for the employer to show that the reason the applicant is paid less than her comparator is due to a genuine error.

  • Different pay structures held to justify pay inequality

    Date:
    1 September 1988
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Reed Packaging Ltd v Boozer and Everhurst (18.3.88) EOR21B, the EAT holds that the existence of separate pay structures for hourly-paid and staff employees amounted to a genuine material factor defence justifying unequal pay. The EAT also rules that where an employer makes out a defence under s.1(3) at a preliminary hearing, there is no need to refer the complaint to an independent expert.

  • Speech therapists' equal value claim blocked

    Date:
    1 March 1987
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Clark and others v Bexley Health Authority and others (26.11.86) EOR12C, a London industrial tribunal holds that the health authorities had a material factor defence to any pay inequalities because they were bound to comply with the pay scales laid down by the Secretary of State under Regulations.