Sheffield City Council v Crosby Ors [2009] UKEAT 0303_08_1702 (17 February 2009)

Sheffield City Council v Crosby Ors [2009] UKEAT 0303_08_1702 (17 February 2009)

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the Council's failure to pay bonuses to carers was not tainted by sex because the bonus was genuinely linked to productivity, which was not applicable to carers' work. For cleaners, the Tribunal permissibly found that a productivity bonus could be applied and that the Council failed to objectively justify the pay difference, so the GMF defence failed for cleaners. Both findings were permissible and disclosed no error of law.

Citation
[2009] UKEAT 0303_08_1702
Parties
Appellants (eat/0303/08/lt): Mrs Gibson and others (Carers); Respondent (eat/0303/08/lt) / Appellant (eat/0304/08/zt): Sheffield City Council; Respondents (eat/0304/08/zt): Mrs Crosby and others (Cleaners)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Equal Pay Act Litigation / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Both appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Equal Pay, Material Factor Defence, Objective Justification, Indirect Discrimination, Sex Discrimination
Employment Law Equality Law Equal Pay Material Factor Defence Objective Justification Indirect Discrimination Sex Discrimination

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Gibson and others (Carers)

Appellants (eat/0303/08/lt)

Sheffield City Council

Respondent (eat/0303/08/lt) / Appellant (eat/0304/08/zt)

Mrs Crosby and others (Cleaners)

Respondents (eat/0304/08/zt)

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Equal Pay Act Litigation / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer (Sheffield City Council) established the genuine material factor (GMF) defence under s.1(3) Equal Pay Act 1970 for pay differences between female claimants and male comparators
  2. 2 Whether objective justification is required where disparate adverse impact is shown
  3. 3 Whether the pay differential was 'tainted by sex'

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that the Council's failure to pay bonuses to carers was not tainted by sex because the bonus was genuinely linked to productivity, which was not applicable to carers' work. For cleaners, the Tribunal permissibly found that a productivity bonus could be applied and that the Council failed to objectively justify the pay difference, so the GMF defence failed for cleaners. Both findings were permissible and disclosed no error of law.

Court Disposition

Both appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal by the Gibson claimants (carers) is dismissed.
  • The appeal by Sheffield City Council (cleaners/Crosby) is dismissed.