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+

Employee relationsEmployment lawEquality, diversity and inclusionMaternityLatest News

Landmark ruling in maternity pay case

by dan thomas 3 May 2005
by dan thomas 3 May 2005

Employers will be forced to include pay rises in calculations for maternity pay following a landmark ruling at the Court of Appeal today.


Michelle Alabaster, who claimed she was underpaid during maternity leave, has won a nine-year legal battle against Barclays Bank.


Alabaster, who started her case against in 1996 when she was pregnant with her daughter, claimed a recent pay rise of just over £200 had not been included in calculations for her maternity pay. The Court of Appeal ruled she should have got the full amount.


Alabaster was working for the Woolwich Building Society, since taken over by Barclays, when she became pregnant.


She claimed the pay rise of £204.53 should have been included in her maternity pay and that her employers were breaking European sex discrimination law by underpaying her.


After her original employment tribunal, Alabaster took the case to an employment appeal tribunal, the Court of Appeal and then the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.


The European court ruled in her favour and on Tuesday the Court of Appeal ruled English law as well as European law allowed her to receive the extra payment.


Her case was supported by the Equal Opportunities Commission, whose chairwoman, Julie Mellor, said the ruling closed a legal loophole.


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.

She told the BBC: “Mrs Alabaster’s nine-year marathon battle to claw back a £200 pay rise she was due in her maternity pay sets a precedent for women bringing equal pay claims while on maternity leave.


“This case demonstrates that the UK’s equal pay legislation needs an overhaul and we are delighted that the court has recognised that women on maternity leave do not need to find a male comparator when bringing equal pay claims.”

dan thomas

previous post
Looks could kill your chances of landing a job
next post
Pope speaks up for workers’ rights

You may also like

Government publishes ‘roadmap’ for Employment Rights Bill

1 Jul 2025

Ethnicity and disability pay gaps: Ready to report?...

1 Jul 2025

Government moves swiftly on immigration reform

1 Jul 2025

One in eight senior NHS managers from black...

1 Jul 2025

Government launches ‘landmark’ review of parental leave

1 Jul 2025

Clarks cuts 1,200 jobs after ‘year of transition’

1 Jul 2025

How HR can support families with adoption

1 Jul 2025

Co-op equal pay claims move onto next stage

30 Jun 2025

‘Be direct’ to avoid escalating conflict, advises Acas

30 Jun 2025

Reforming paternity leave could benefit UK by £13bn...

30 Jun 2025

  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...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+