14 August 2008 / Ian Smith

Issue: 7334 / Categories: Features , Employment

printer

mail-detail

What hope for equal pay?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Ian Smith highlights the complexities of three unusual employment claims

In Allen v GMB [2008] EWCA Civ 810, [2008] All ER (D) 207 (Jul) the Court of Appeal turned over the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). In this high profile case, equal pay claimants insisted on taking their claims to the full (with conditional fee agreement legal backing) instead of going with union-negotiated compromises and are suing their union for sex discrimination in not pursuing their claims sufficiently.

No justification?

They won before the tribunal (potentially at great financial cost to the union), but then the EAT allowed the union's appeal by a whisker, holding that there was indeed indirect discrimination in the union sacrificing certain (female) members' full legal rights for the greater good of job protection and pay protection for other members but that it was justified—the union's “greater good” argument was a legitimate aim and (more controversially) its means were proportionate, even though it had been distinctly “hard” in its treatment of the refusenik members.

It is

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

What hope for equal pay?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Ian Smith highlights the complexities of three unusual employment claims

In Allen v GMB [2008] EWCA Civ 810, [2008] All ER (D) 207 (Jul) the Court of Appeal turned over the decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). In this high profile case, equal pay claimants insisted on taking their claims to the full (with conditional fee agreement legal backing) instead of going with union-negotiated compromises and are suing their union for sex discrimination in not pursuing their claims sufficiently.

No justification?

They won before the tribunal (potentially at great financial cost to the union), but then the EAT allowed the union's appeal by a whisker, holding that there was indeed indirect discrimination in the union sacrificing certain (female) members' full legal rights for the greater good of job protection and pay protection for other members but that it was justified—the union's “greater good” argument was a legitimate aim and (more controversially) its means were proportionate, even though it had been distinctly “hard” in its treatment of the refusenik members.

It is

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nick Vernon, Walkers Bermuda

Nick Vernon of Walkers on swapping Birmingham for Bermuda and building an employment practice by the sea

Bird & Bird—Christian Bartsch

Bird & Bird—Christian Bartsch

Global firm re-elects CEO for second term

Fletchers Group—Miriam Hall

Fletchers Group—Miriam Hall

Business appoints managing director of operational excellence

NEWS

NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation

NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’

Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies

NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins

Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid

NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements

The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation

back-to-top-scroll