Updated to include information on Asda Stores v Brierley and others, in which the EAT held that supermarket employees were able to compare their work with that of depot workers.
Definition from the XpertHR glossary.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has considered the circumstances in which the terms and conditions of employees derive from the "same source" as their comparators for the purposes of the Equal Pay Act 1970.
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers equal pay.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has given guidance on when employment tribunals can set aside the general rule that the use of length of service to set pay levels does not have to be objectively justified in order to defeat an equal pay claim.
The Court of Appeal has held that arrangements to protect the pay of predominantly male groups after a job evaluation scheme were discriminatory and could not be justified.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that equal pay claimants had not complied with step one of the statutory grievance procedure when the comparators specified in their grievances were substantially different from those in their tribunal claim.
The Court of Appeal ruled in Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge and others  EWCA Civ 929 that a woman claiming equal pay may rely on a job evaluation study even where the woman's job has been assigned a higher value than that of her comparator.
In Home Office v (1) Bailey and others, (2) Martin and others, (3) Beachcroft and others, the EAT holds that the jobs of female administrative staff in the Prison Service could not be said to have been rated as equivalent to those of male prison officers in a job evaluation scheme which gave them slightly lower scores.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to equal pay for work rated as equivalent.