header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 August 2007
Issue: 7286 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law brief: 17 August 2007

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

GMB v ALLEN
ANTIPATHY BETWEEN TRADE UNIONS AND dissident members
AUTONOMY VERSUS PATERNALISM
ROUGH INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

While most of the noises of wind that readers will have been hearing recently are the sounds of the incessant rain clouds in this miserable non summer, some may well have been the collective sighs of relief of trade unionists all over the country at the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in GMB v Allen [2007] UKEAT/425/06 (handed down on 31 July) allowing the union’s appeal against a tribunal decision that it had been guilty of sex discrimination and victimisation in not pursuing in full the claims of some female members to equal pay, in particular in relation to back pay.

EQUAL PAY CASE MANAGEMENT

The case is one of the latest stages in the equal pay trench warfare currently raging in the context of local authority pay in northern England. So worrying is this litigation in general—in terms of legal costs and tribunal/ACAS resources—that it even featured in the recent Gibbons Report on the

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When saying no to mediation pays
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll