Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Latest News

Equal pay comparator case triumph

by Personnel Today 15 Jun 2001
by Personnel Today 15 Jun 2001

An office administrator, who worked for an insurance
brokers, has been paid £10,400 in an equal pay claim which was settled out of
court settlement.

Sarah Daly, who worked for Bennetts, claimed she was
paid almost £4,000 less than a male colleague doing work of equal value.  Daly had worked at her former employer’s
since August 1996, initially as an insurance advisor and then as an office
administrator from 1999.

She compared her pay with a man who worked as an insurance
adviser, and found that her comparator was paid £13,000 a year, compared with
her salary of £9,100.

Daly requested a pay rise from her employers but was
refused and consequently resigned. An employment tribunal commissioned an
independent expert to prepare a report and the expert concluded that Ms Daly’s
work was of equal value to her comparator.

Bennett’s acknowledged that they had no grading
structure but claimed that salary reviews were based on performance as well as
issues such as attendance, application, drive, and dynamism.

Julie Mellor, chair of the EOC said, “Ms Daly’s case
raises important issues for all employers. 
Without a fair and transparent pay structure it can be all too easy for
pay discrimination, conscious or not, to occur.”

www.eoc.org.uk

By Karen Higginbottom

Avatar
Personnel Today

previous post
Charity predicts care sector crisis
next post
Dust settles on Government restructure

You may also like

Employment law changes for 2022 and beyond: update...

1 Jul 2022

BT workers vote for strike action over pay

1 Jul 2022

Chief financial officers now more involved in HR

1 Jul 2022

Top 10 HR questions June 2022: Former employees

1 Jul 2022

Pay all care workers a £10.50 hourly minimum...

30 Jun 2022

Royal Mail managers vote to strike over restructure

30 Jun 2022

Give wellbeing a board seat: Prof Sir Cary...

30 Jun 2022

One in five workplaces lack LGBT support policies

30 Jun 2022

Christian doctor loses transgender pronoun case, but beliefs...

29 Jun 2022

New chief workforce officer at NHS England

29 Jun 2022
  • NSPCC revamps its learning strategy with child wellbeing at its heart PROMOTED | The NSPCC’s mission is to prevent abuse and neglect...Read more
  • Diversity versus inclusion: Why the difference matters PROMOTED | It’s possible for an environment to be diverse, but not inclusive...Read more
  • Five steps for organisations across the globe to become more skills-driven PROMOTED | The shift in the world of work has been felt across the globe...Read more
  • The future of workforce development PROMOTED | Northumbria University and partners share insight...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+