header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 March 2017 / Stephen Levinson
Issue: 7736 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Red tape that misses the point on equal pay

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Stephen Levinson lays bare the flaws & imperfections of the Gender Pay Gap Regulations

  • Inadequate enforcement & sanctions
  • The regulations exclude a “partner in a firm” and a member of an LLP

New rules under the Equality Act 2010 (Gender Pay Gap Information) Regulations 2017, which will apply to private sector organisations with 250 or more employees mean employers will be required to calculate on an annual basis the mean and median hourly pay gap between the sexes as at 5 April each year, a date to be called the “snapshot date”. This information must supplied to government and published on the organisation’s web site, where it must be retained for at least three years. There is a permitted time lag of one year so the first deadline for publication will be 4 April 2018.

In addition employers within scope have to publish the annual bonus gap between the sexes and state the proportion of men and women who received a bonus in the year. There

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll