Equal Pay

Peter and Sheila work for the same employer and do the same job. They have equal skills and experience but Peter is paid more than Sheila because he is a man and she is a woman. How unfair is that? Does it still happen in this day and age? The simple answer is that it’s totally unfair and still happening.

The Equal Pay Act has been part of our law since 1970, 37 years ago. In its simplest form it provides that men and women carrying out “like work” cannot be paid differently or have less favourable terms and conditions because of sex. “Like work” does not have to be work that is identical. It is enough if it is of the same nature or of a broadly similar nature. So, for example, a woman making yoghurt can say she is doing like work to a man making cheese.

Back to Peter and Sheila. Sheila establishes that she is doing work that is essentially the same as Peter but she is paid 35p an hour less than him. Does she win her claim? Not necessarily. It depends on whether her employer can show that the pay differential can be explained by something that has nothing to do with the fact that Sheila is female. The fact that a job is traditionally seen as “women’s work” is not a good defence.

A woman who thinks she may not be getting equal pay can write to her employer asking for information that should clarify the position. There is a standard questionnaire that can be used.

In any event, before making a claim to an Employment Tribunal a disgruntled female employee who believes that she is being treated less favourably should raise a grievance with her employer.
Up to 6 years’ back pay plus interest can be awarded by an Employment Tribunal when it finds a breach of the Equal Pay Act.

Although the Act also protects men, the simple truth is that women are much more likely to need its protection.

Published 13/03/2007.