header-logo header-logo

Bridging the gap

19 May 2017 / Gemma Woodhouse , Hilary Aldred
Issue: 7746 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
nlj_7746_aldread

Hilary Aldred & Gemma Woodhouse deal with the requirement to report under the Gender Pay Gap Regulations

  • How to deal with ‘problem’ employees and ‘problem’ areas.
  • Considering how to report.

Most legal practitioners, HR directors, HR managers and employers are aware of their general obligations under the Equality Act 2010 (Gender Pay Gap Information) Regulations 2017 (SI 2017/172) (the regulations). By now, employers will have ascertained whether or not the regulations apply to them, and some will also have been preparing draft calculations. There are, however, a number of significant issues for businesses who are not only looking to publish their pay gap data, but also seeking to minimise any potential fallout.

Problem areas—hours

The regulations are clear that the calculation of any average hourly rate should be based on the normal working hours within the contract of employment rather than on the hours actually worked by an individual. This may well lead to unsatisfactory results as it fails to take account of individuals who are working hours

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll