In Somerset Council and another v Pike  IRLR 870 CA, the Court of Appeal held that a pension scheme that excluded part-time work done by employees already in receipt of a pension was potentially discriminatory because it had a disproportionate impact on women. The Court of Appeal ruled that, in assessing whether or not there has been indirect discrimination, the relevant pool for comparison must exclude those who have no interest in the effect of the practice under challenge - in this case employees not yet in receipt of their pension.
In Carl v University of Sheffield  IRLR 616 EAT, the EAT held that a part-time worker complaining of less favourable treatment does not have to show that the treatment was solely on the ground of his or her part-time status. The EAT also held that the comparison must be with an actual, not a hypothetical, comparator.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.