An attempt by Sainsbury’s to challenge an equal pay claim, on the grounds an employment tribunal should have declined most of the claims on a technicality, has been dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
As a result, more than 700 members of staff suing the Big 4 grocer and in-store pharmacy chain Lloyds, have won their bid to remain in a long-running equal pay suit, according to reporting by Law360.
The case involves two separate equal pay claims against both businesses, with one started by women seeking equal pay to male staff, and the second looking to see that men’s pay does not drop below women’s pay if the first claims were to continue.
Sainsbury’s looked to remove most of the 865 claimants in the lawsuit by stating their names were not listed in early-stage paperwork.
However, last Thursday a panel of three judges ruled that this was “highly technical” and lacked “any substantive merit.”
Subscribe to Grocery Gazette for free
Sign up here to get the latest grocery and food news each morning
Judge David Bean said, “it has been repeatedly stated that employment tribunals should do their best not to place artificial barriers in the way of genuine claims,” adding there was no implication that the workers has failed to follow correct procedures.
“The complaint is no more and no less than that the employment tribunal claim form did not give the appropriate certificate number.”
Bean added: “I do not accept … that the existence of the certificate should be checked before proceedings can be issued, still less to lay down that if the certificate number was incorrectly entered or omitted the claim is doomed from the start.”
In a joint statement, the representatives of the workers at law firm, Leigh Day, Linda Wong and Lauren Lougheed added: “Women are still being paid less than men more than 60 years after the introduction of equal pay laws.
“Sainsbury’s had a choice about defending these claims on their merits, or trying to reduce the number of claimants by making ‘highly technical applications.”
A spokesperson for Sainsbury’s told Law360 that its male and female employees get the same rate of pay, adding that the supermarket has “invested substantially” in its colleagues over the last few years, “including £205 million of support in the last 12 months.”
The next hearing in the claim, which argues that the work of female employees is of equal value to that of male workers, is set to take place in March 2024.
5 Comments. Leave new
Before I retired. I worked for Tesco.Spent 29 (1986-2015) year’s of a 35 (1980-2015) year’s career as Customer Assistant: Trolleys.I was paid lower then the checkout cashier/operator ladies.Did I complain.No I didn’t.Just got on with my job.Even though I was part of the checkout,Customer service.tobacco kiosk and trolley combined departments.
This is not just about female workers. Typically make workers unloading and reloading lorries at the stores have been paid much less than workers unloading and reloading the same lorries at Sainsbury’s depots. This has been going on for decades.
Edit “typically male workers”
I remember a landmark case where UK insurers were taken, enmasse, to court over a claim that young female drivers should pay less than males and that they were being treated in a sexist way.
Outcome: To address the allegations of sexism the industry put up female premiums overnight to be equal to those of the males. So that worked out well
When will male tennis players be paid the same hourly rate as less skilled female ones? Men discriminated against again.