Equal pay

bradrock

Think I have an equal pay claim.
The facts are. Big firm.

We all got 10.80 per hour.
We all have hgv 2 licence.
3 people have hgv 1 to.

The hgv 1 is not relevant to do our job and is not needed for it only class 2.
If the job is advertised it is done for a hgv 2 driver.

They have gave the class 1 drivers a pay rise to 12 a  hour but not us.

The jobs we all do is identical with no difference.

Cheers

TadleyBaggie

Are all the class 2 drivers woman (and the class 1 men)? If so you might have a case.

Otherwise unless there is some clear discrimination, the company can pay who they want, want they want.

Are you in a union?

Dakta

As far as I'm aware a company can (generally) pay different rates staff for the same job - is the contract you hold between yourself and your employer being breached in any way?


It might be that they plan to make use of the licenses these other offer, or want to incentivise them to stay if pay rates for these licenses are higher elsewhere?

TadleyBaggie

Also strikingly similar to one of your previous posts a few years ago:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5809586/tupe-transfer-and-equal-pay#latest

bradrock

I read the acas website and was under tge Impression that like for like job was yo be paid the same unless they had skills that was crucial to the job we r doing and it isn't. 

But if there's nothing I can do then that's fair enough 

Brie

We all got 10.80 per hour.
We all have hgv 2 licence.
3 people have hgv 1 to.

So those that have an HGV2 get £10.80 and those that have both a HGV2 & an HGV1 get £12?  So are being paid more for being more qualified?  Which sounds fair, even if they don't currently need the HGV1 for work.

Sandtree

So do your HGV1 and get the higher pay too.

Whilst they may not be using the skills of the HGV1 at present they are aware that there is a shortage of people with HGV skills and it would appear are trying to avoid people leaving for better paid jobs by recognising their skill even if unused.

Even if it was coincidence that all those with HGV1 were male or white etc and all those with HGV2 were female or black or disabled etc then there is a reasonably good chance that they could defend any claim on the grounds that there is a real reason other than the protected characteristics for the pay difference.

Equal pay is only about protected characteristics not for skill level etc

bradrock

TadleyBaggie said:

Also strikingly similar to one of your previous posts a few years ago:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5809586/tupe-transfer-and-equal-pay#latest

It is yes at that time they did match us 

TBagpuss

bradrock said:

I read the acas website and was under tge Impression that like for like job was yo be paid the same unless they had skills that was crucial to the job we r doing and it isn't. 

But if there's nothing I can do then that's fair enough 

No, that would be if the reason for the difference was based on a protected characteristic.

So if they were paying all the male drivers £12 and all the female drivers £10, there would be a claim because the difference was based on their gender. However, they could then defend that case, and be acting lawfully, if all the men had the HGV2 licence *and* that was essential to the job they were actually doing.

If al l the men had that licence but it wasn't needed or used for the job they were actually doing then there would be a discrimination claim.

but simply paying people different amount, or paying people with more qualifications more, isn't in itself unlawful

TELLIT01

bradrock said:

I read the acas website and was under tge Impression that like for like job was yo be paid the same unless they had skills that was crucial to the job we r doing and it isn't. 

That is simply not the case.  Everywhere I ever worked had grade scales with people theoretically moving up the scale as they gained more experience.  Even those with all the required experience weren't on the same wage.  Time in job with the associated wage increments affected pay too.