Council workers win right to bring equal pay claims

In what has been hailed as a “landmark decision”, the Court of Appeal has upheld a ruling allowing equal pay claims to be heard in the High Court as well as at an Employment Tribunal.

The decision means this will be the first time this has been made possible since the Equal Pay Act was introduced in 1970. It is significant because cases must normally be heard within six months at Employment Tribunal, but six years at the High Court.

The case involves 174 women who worked as cleaners, cooks, catering staff and care staff. They claimed compensation for bonuses they say they were excluded from as these were handed out to employees in traditionally male-dominated jobs such as refuse collectors, street cleaners, road workers and gravediggers. In 2007 and 2008 tens of thousands of pounds were paid to female employees of Birmingham City Council to compensate them for years of chronic underpayment.

Only workers who were still in the job or who had recently left were eligible. Those who had ceased being employed by the Council more than six months before were not eligible due to the Employment Tribunal limitation period. 

These claims were then brought as breach of contract claims in the High Court. In December 2010 the High Court in London agreed that these claims could be heard in the Civil Courts. Birmingham City Council appealed this decision but the Court of Appeal has now upheld the decision, making it clear that it is possible to bring an equal pay claim in the civil courts, for which the limitation period will be six years.

Partner at Leigh Day & Co, Chris Benson, who is representing the ex-workers said:

“Every judge that has considered this case in both the High Court and Court of Appeal has expressed the view quite clearly that these claims on behalf of our clients would be successful and Birmingham City Council would lose. Birmingham City Council are trying through legal technicalities to avoid paying what they owe to our clients and in doing so are continuing to waste taxpayers' money, ramping up the legal costs unnecessarily by fighting a hopeless battle.

“The fees the council are spending on litigation could be used to contribute to a settlement that would see women paid the money they are owed after years of unlawful underpayment. It is disappointing for our clients and no doubt of concern to the taxpayers of Birmingham that they have decided to appeal again to the Supreme Court and we would urge them to reconsider."

He added: “The decision could lead to many other claims coming forward as for decades, male council workers could earn thousands on top of their salaries in bonuses, despite being on the same pay grade as their female colleagues. In some councils these inequalities have only recently been phased out and in other cases the inequalities amazingly still exist.”

A Birmingham City Council spokesperson told the BBC: "We are disappointed by the judgment and are currently considering our next step, which could include an appeal."