All items: Maternity pay

• expand

  Abdoulaye and others v Régie Nationale Des Usines Renault SA [1999] IRLR 811 ECJ (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Pregnancy and maternity: Compensatory maternity allowance does not breach EC law

    Date:

    15 November 1999

    In Abdoulaye and others v Régie Nationale des Usines Renault SA, the ECJ rules that Article 141 of the Treaty of Rome does not preclude the making of a lump-sum payment exclusively to female workers who take maternity leave where that payment is designed to offset the occupational disadvantages which arise for those workers as a result of their being away from work.

  • Maternity bonus lawful

    Date:

    1 September 1999

    In Abdoulaye and others v Regie Nationale des Usines Renault SA the European Court of Justice has ruled that a maternity bonus to women did not discriminate against men so as to contravene Article 119 of the EC Treaty.

• expand

  Alabaster v Barclays Bank plc and Secretary of State for Social Security (No.2) [2005] IRLR 576 CA (4 reports relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: case law update

    Date:

    3 February 2006

    We review recent significant equal pay cases and their implications. Developments of note include the application of the "single source" test to comparators within an employment unit, and a reference to the ECJ on whether use of length of service as a pay system criterion requires specific objective justification.

  • Maternity leave and equal pay: Male comparator not required in maternity pay claim

    Date:

    24 June 2005

    In Alabaster v Barclays Bank plc, the Court of Appeal holds that the answer to the problem of how to enable an employee effectively to enforce her right to claim arrears of maternity pay (owed to her as a result of a failure to take into account a pay rise awarded before her maternity leave started, but after the reference period for calculating her maternity pay had ended) lay in removing the requirement in s.1(1) of the Equal Pay Act 1970 for her to point to a male comparator.

  • No need for male comparator in maternity equal pay claims

    Date:

    1 June 2005

    In Alabaster v Barclays Bank plc and the Secretary of State for Social Security (3 May 2005), the Court of Appeal holds that in equal pay claims relating to maternity, the requirement for a male comparator in s.1 of the Equal Pay Act should be disapplied in order to comply with art. 141 of the EC Treaty.

  • Ruling leads to changes in SMP pay rise awards

    Date:

    10 May 2005

    Catherine Taylor, employment partner at Olswang, looks at the implications for employers of the recent adjustment of domestic law to comply with the ECJ's ruling that pay rises must be reflected in statutory maternity pay.

• expand

  Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security [2000] IRLR 754 EAT (2 reports relating to this case)

  • SMP Regulations breach EU law

    Date:

    1 September 2000

    In Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security, the EAT has ruled that an amendment made to the Statutory Maternity Pay Regulations failed to implement fully the European Court's decision in the Gillespie case because it does not allow women on maternity leave the benefit of pay increases that are not backdated.

  • Maternity pay: Benefit of non-backdated pay increase should have been added to maternity pay

    Date:

    15 June 2000

    In Alabaster v Woolwich plc and another, the EAT holds that a woman was entitled to see the benefit of a pay increase awarded before she went on maternity leave reflected in the calculation of her earnings-related, higher-rate statutory maternity pay ("SMP").

• expand

  Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security [2002] IRLR 420 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal value update

    Date:

    1 May 2003

    Kate Godwin charts the recent developments on equal pay and reports on key equal value cases.

• expand

  Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security [2004] IRLR 486 ECJ (4 reports relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: SMP must include pay rise effective after reference period

    Date:

    18 June 2004

    In Alabaster v Woolwich plc, the European Court of Justice holds that article 119 (now 141) of the EC Treaty of Rome requires that earnings-related maternity pay must reflect any pay rise awarded between the start of the reference period (upon which the level of the earnings-related maternity pay is based) and the end of the employee's maternity leave.

  • Maternity pay to include all pay rises during maternity leave

    Date:

    1 June 2004

    In Alabaster v (1) Woolwich plc and (2) Secretary of State for Social Security, the ECJ rules that the earnings-related element of statutory maternity pay must include a pay rise made at any time before the end of maternity leave.

  • Maternity rights: gap in the law highlighted

    Date:

    1 May 2004

    The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that a woman who receives a pay rise at any time before the end of her maternity leave must receive the benefit of this in the earnings-related part of her maternity pay.

  • Case round up: incorporated contract terms; and calculating statutory maternity pay

    Date:

    20 April 2004

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: incorporated contract terms; and calculating statutory maternity pay.

• expand

  Banks v (1) Tesco Stores Ltd and (2) Secretary of State for Social Security [1997] IT/18985/95 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Maternity pay challenge rejected

    Date:

    1 September 1997

    The rules on statutory maternity pay (SMP) which deny payment to women whose earnings are below the lower earnings limit do not breach EC law, holds an Ashford industrial tribunal (Chair: D E de Saxe) in Banks v (1) Tesco Stores Ltd and (2) Secretary of State for Social Security.

• expand

  Banks v Tesco Stores Ltd [1999] ICR 1141 IT (2 reports relating to this case)

  • SMP not indirectly discriminatory

    Date:

    1 March 1998

    The rules on statutory maternity pay (SMP) which deny payment to women whose earnings are below the lower earnings limit cannot be held to be indirectly discriminatory on grounds of sex, an Ashford industrial tribunal (Chair: D E de Saxe) has held in Banks v (1) Tesco Stores Ltd and (2) Secretary of State for Social Security.

  • Equal pay: Challenge to SMP exclusion fails

    Date:

    15 September 1997

    In Banks v (1) Tesco Stores Ltd (2) Secretary of State for Social Security, an industrial tribunal holds that the contract of a part-time employee, who was not eligible for SMP because her earnings were less than the lower earnings limit for payment of national insurance contributions, was less favourable in respect of parental leave than that of a male comparator who was unconditionally entitled to three days' paid parental leave.

• expand

  Banks v Tesco Stores Ltd and another [1999] ICR 1141 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Pregnancy and maternity: Qualifying conditions for SMP do not breach Community law

    Date:

    15 November 1999

    A refusal to pay statutory maternity pay to a woman on maternity leave who did not satisfy all of the conditions of eligibility for such did not constitute sex discrimination contrary to Article 141 of the Treaty of Rome, holds the EAT in Banks v (1) Tesco Stores Ltd (2) Secretary of State for Social Security.

• expand

  Boyle and others v Equal Opportunities Commission [1996] IT/2400262/96 (1 report relating to this case)

  • Maternity questions referred to ECJ

    Date:

    1 December 1996

    Whether the civil service maternity scheme conditions are in breach of EC law is to be determined by the European Court of Justice following a reference by a Manchester industrial tribunal (Chair: A F W Woolley) in Boyle and others v Equal Opportunities Commission.

• expand

  Boyle and others v Equal Opportunities Commission [1998] IRLR 717 ECJ (3 reports relating to this case)

  • Sick man comparison not permitted

    Date:

    1 March 1999

    In Boyle v Equal Opportunities Commission the European Court of Justice has rejected a challenge under EC law to the civil service maternity scheme based on the argument that women on maternity leave were treated less favourably than men on sick leave.

  • Maternity rights: Return or repayment provision compatible with EC law

    Date:

    1 January 1999

    A contractual term which requires a woman to undertake to return to work on the expiry of her maternity leave or otherwise to repay any amounts paid to her by her employer over and above statutory maternity pay during that period, does not contravene the equal pay principle contained in Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome and the Equal Pay Directive, rules the European Court of Justice in Boyle and others v Equal Opportunities Commission.

  • ECJ draws the line

    Date:

    1 January 1999

    In Boyle and others v Equal Opportunities Commission (27 October 1998) EOR83A the European Court of Justice has distinguished between the unfavourable treatment of women because they are pregnant and the unfavourable treatment of women because they are on maternity leave.