All items: Work of equal value

• expand

  Farrer v J Tomlinson & Son Ltd [1998] ET/1802317/96 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Holiday and sick pay variation justified

    Date:

    1 March 1999

    In Farrer v J Tomlinson & Son Ltd a Leeds employment tribunal (Chair: J M Q Hepworth) upholds the employer's genuine material factor defence and rejects a claim by a male joiner that he was entitled to the same terms relating to holiday pay, sick pay and lay-off, as his comparator, a female secretary employed on work of equal value.

• expand

  Harding v Skandia Asset Management Ltd [2000] ET/3204139/99 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal pay reference to ECJ

    Date:

    1 December 2000

    In Harding v Skandia Asset Management Ltd a Stratford employment tribunal (Chair: Q Barry), refers to the European Court of Justice the issue of whether a woman can compare herself for equal pay purposes with a man employed by an associated company in Sweden.

• expand

  Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd [1984] IRLR 463 IT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Non-wage benefits can offset basic rate in implementing equality clause

    Date:

    1 November 1985

    At the resumed hearing of Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd (IT, 12.9.85) EOR4B, the tribunal holds that in implementing an award of equal pay for work of equal value, the term "pay" should be construed in accordance with the extended definition given to it by Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome and that, accordingly, equal pay means terms and conditions which considered as a whole are not less favourable.

• expand

  Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd [1986] IRLR 287 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Higher benefits offset lower pay in implementing equality clause

    Date:

    1 September 1986

    In Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd (19.5.86) EOR9C, the EAT rules that an employer does not have to pay a woman employed on work of equal value the same basic wage as her male comparators if, considered as a whole, her terms and conditions are not less favourable.

• expand

  Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd [1987] IRLR 186 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Overall remuneration must be looked at to implement equality clause

    Date:

    1 May 1987

    In Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd (5.3.87) EOR13B, the Court of Appeal rules that in implementing an equality clause, all elements of remuneration must be taken into account so that higher benefits can offset lower pay.

• expand

  Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd [1988] IRLR 257 HL (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Equality clause requires each contractual term to be not less favourable

    Date:

    1 July 1988

    In Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd (5.5.88) EOR20A, the House of Lords rules that a woman employed on work of equal value to that of a man is entitled to have any less favourable term of her contract made not less favourable irrespective of whether she is as favourably treated as the man on the whole.

  • Equal pay: Comparison of overall remuneration rejected

    Date:

    1 June 1988

    In Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Limited, the House of Lords rules that a successful equal pay claimant is entitled to have each distinct term in her contract of employment modified so that it is no less favourable than the corresponding term In her comparator's contract.

• expand

  Henry v University of Leeds [1997] IT/6940/96 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Independent expert stage avoided

    Date:

    1 March 1998

    Bragg v St Monica Home of Rest and Henry v University of Leeds are two of the few equal value cases so far in which an industrial tribunal has exercised its new discretion to determine the question itself rather than appoint an independent expert.

• expand

  Hicking v Basford Home Fashions [1999] ET/260115/98 (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Tribunal categorises injury to feelings

    Date:

    1 June 1999

    In Hicking v Basford Home Fashions Ltd a Nottingham employment tribunal (Chair: J K Macmillan) awards £7,360 compensation, including £5,000 for "considerable" injury to feelings, to a female warehouse operative who was selected for redundancy because she was a woman.

  • Two-year limit applied post-Levez

    Date:

    1 March 1999

    In Hicking v Basford Home Fashions a Nottingham employment tribunal (Chair: J K Macmillan) upholds a claim for equal pay for work of equal value and, applying the European Court of Justice's decision in Levez, limits its award to two years' back pay.

• expand

  Hovell v Ashford and St Peter's Hospital NHS Trust [2009] IRLR 734 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: Small difference in points under job evaluation scheme does not establish that jobs are of equal value

    Date:

    30 September 2009

    In Hovell v Ashford and St Peter's Hospital NHS Trust [2009] IRLR 734 CA, the Court of Appeal held that a small difference in points between a woman's job and that of her equivalently rated comparator in a job evaluation scheme does not of itself establish that the jobs are of equal value. However, where the employee's job has been marked lower than her comparator's, an employment tribunal is not bound by law to order an independent expert's report before determining the equal value claim. This is a matter for the discretion of the tribunal.

• expand

  Hughes v West Berkshire Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health [1999] IRLR 155 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: Successful applicant had to "mirror" her comparator on incremental pay scale

    Date:

    15 March 1999

    A female employee who had established that her work as a speech therapist was of equal value to that of her comparator, a clinical psychologist, was entitled to be paid on the appropriate scale at the particular point that he had reached, and to progress up that scale at the same rate as him, holds the EAT in Evesham v North Hertfordshire Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health; Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health; Hughes v West Berkshire Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health.