Gibson v Sheffield City Council [2009] All ER (D) 133 (Mar)
An employer is not required to provide objective justification for the pay differential between the female claimants and their male comparators where he shows that the difference in treatment is not “tainted by sex” (following Surtees v Middlesborough County Council [2008] EWCA Civ 885; [2008] IRLR 776), [2008] All ER (D) 386 (Jul).
Where the employer identifies some particular and specific factor which he contends caused the difference in pay but which is applied only to a predominantly male group, it will be sex-tainted unless he can show that the factor applied only so as to benefit the male group but for nondiscriminatory reasons.
If, but only if, the employer cannot show that the reason was not due to the difference of sex, he must show objective justification for the disparity between the woman’s contract and the man’s contract (see also Hartlepool Borough Council v Dolphin [2009] IRLR 168).
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=16d9dd3d_1)
