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

Limit to equal pay comparison

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand

    Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others [1999] IRLR 148 EAT (2 other reports)

    • Claim by ex-council staff rejected

      Date:
      1 June 1999

      In Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others the EAT has ruled that in order to bring an equal pay claim, the applicant and comparator must be in the same establishment or service.

    • Equal pay: No comparison permitted between former council staff and existing employees

      Date:
      15 March 1999

      An employment tribunal had correctly concluded that former council employees working for a contractor providing contracted-out services could not compare themselves with existing council staff doing work that had previously been found to be of equal value to their own, holds the EAT in Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care and others. While Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome does not limit permissible comparisons to those employed by the same employer, the applicant and comparator in an equal pay claim must nevertheless "in a loose and non-technical sense be in the same establishment or service". There was nothing about the present case "which would distinguish it from any other case where an applicant claimed equal pay with a comparator employed by another company, not necessarily even engaged in the same industry".

In Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others (5 November 1998) EOR84C, the EAT holds that former employees of a county council, who are now employed by private contractors, are not entitled to bring an equal pay claim relying on Article 119 of the EC Treaty comparing themselves with current employees of the council whose work had been rated as equivalent to their own.