Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Equal payPublic sector

Equal pay: local authority and limited liability partnership were “associated employers”

by Kate Hodgkiss 19 May 2014
by Kate Hodgkiss 19 May 2014

In DLA Piper’s latest case report, the Court of Session held that limited liability partnerships (LLPs) that were contracted to carry out duties that were formerly carried out by a local authority were “associated employers” of the council for equal pay purposes.

XpertHR resources

Equal pay policy

Equal pay: good practice

How to carry out an equal pay audit

Glasgow City Council and others v Unison claimants and another [2014] CSIH 27 CS

Facts

In recent years, there has been a shift away from the provision of certain public services directly by local authorities, resulting in a trend towards restructuring the provision of public services in the form of “arm’s length external organisations” (ALEOs) and other enterprises.

The appellants in this case were two LLPs and Glasgow City Council. The LLPs were contracted to carry out duties that were formerly carried out by the local authority.

Employment tribunal and EAT decisions

Employees of the LLPs, backed by Unison and Fox Cross, raised claims in the employment tribunal under the Equal Pay Act 1970 (now replaced by the Equality Act 2010). They argued that they were entitled to equal pay in relation to their chosen comparators, who were individuals directly employed by the council. They argued that the LLPs were under the council’s effective control, as demonstrated by the fact that, under the LLP agreements, they were required to implement any direction of the council and the council was entitled to “99.999% of the profits” of the LLPs. Essentially, it was argued that the LLPs were just extensions of the council, carrying out public functions but at a distance in terms of formal structure.

The employment tribunal held that the Equal Pay Act 1970 applies only to “companies” and this could not be interpreted to include LLPs. As the council and the LLPs were not associated employers, the Equal Pay Act 1970 did not apply.

In the alternative, the claimants argued that the council was the “single source” of employment for the purposes of EU law. The tribunal disagreed and held that, although the council had theoretical control over the LLPs, it did not actually exercise this control and therefore it could not be the “single source” of employment.

The claimants appealed to the EAT, which overturned the tribunal’s decision and found in their favour. The council and the LLPs then appealed the case to the Scottish Court of Session.

Court of Session decision

The Scottish Court of Session held that the term “companies” in the Equal Pay Act 1970 should be interpreted to include LLPs. An LLP is an economic entity with a separate legal personality from its members and a limitation of liability by definition. It has many features in common with a company. The Court of Session held that the Equal Pay Act 1970 should be interpreted to comply with the principles of the Equal Pay Directive. The council and the LLPs were held to be associated employers, and comparator employees were entitled to receive equal pay.

Once this was established, it was no longer necessary for the claimants to rely on the direct effect of art.157 and show that the council was the “single source”. However, the Court of Session made its view clear that the council could be the “single source” of employment, seeing as the LLPs were owned by the council and were subject to scrutiny from the council.

Implications

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

In these times of outsourcing and restructuring, it is important for employers to remain vigilant in relation to equal pay issues as employees are transferred to different ALEOs or other branches of a corporate structure. The equal pay legislation has been broadly interpreted to apply to commercial entities with distinct legal personality, rather than restricted specifically to companies.

Employers should be mindful of the risk of claims and take steps to identify situations where comparator employees might exist in separate branches of the organisation and ensure that employees receive equal pay for equal work. In situations where two or more entities may be considered to be “associated employers”, a review of employees’ contractual terms and conditions with a view to ensuring equality between comparators is a valuable aspect of risk management strategy prior to an outsourcing or restructuring.

Kate Hodgkiss

Kate Hodgkiss is a partner at DLA Piper.

previous post
Monitoring MoHaWK clinical governance system
next post
World Cup 2014: six winning tactics for employers

You may also like

BBC Breakfast bullying and misconduct allegations under investigation

20 Jun 2025

Spending Review: ‘Much-needed’ cash but ‘little on workforce’

11 Jun 2025

Healthdaq: Shaking up health and social care recruitment

11 Jun 2025

Birmingham bin workers vote to continue strikes

6 Jun 2025

Rise in secondary school recruitment in England

5 Jun 2025

Lawyers to be enticed back to resolve skills...

5 Jun 2025

HS2 whistleblower awarded £320,000 by tribunal

5 Jun 2025

Sickness absence falls to almost pre-pandemic rate

4 Jun 2025

Unions ponder strike action after public sector pay...

23 May 2025

Public sector workers gain pay rises of up...

22 May 2025

  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...Read more
  • Preparing for a new era of workforce planning (webinar) WEBINAR | Employers now face...Read more
  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...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 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+