Thursday 1 November 2012

Women's Rights Storm the Rickety Workplace Citadel

The long fight for equality in the workplace has taken a significant step forward with a recent Supreme Court judgment extending the time-limit for equal pay claims and the European Union's announcement of an increased mandatory quota for the number of women directors who must sit on company boards, to be debated in November 2012.

The Supreme Court judgment relates to 174 former Birmingham City Council female workers who were employed in traditionally female roles such as cleaners, care staff and cooks. Their equal pay claim arose as men in equivalent roles, such as road workers, street cleaners and refuse collectors were given consistent bonuses of up to £15,000, despite them being on the same salary as their lady counter-parts.

Birmingham City Council appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, arguing that the former employees should have lodged their claims with an Employment Tribunal within 6 months of the termination of their employment, as is the current legal standing under section 129(3) of the Equality Act 2010.

The Supreme Court rejected their rationale and has opened the door for all equal pay claims to be heard in the civil courts, which have a 6 year time-limit in which to bring a claim. This is a substantial increase on the previous 6 month time-limit in the Employment Tribunal. Fortuitously, it also offers the remedy of higher damages which are uncapped in the High Court, unlike in their Tribunal cousin.

While this is clearly a decision in the interests of justice and gender equality, it poses possible problems for employers. For example, if a former employee with a valid claim makes a late claim 5 or 6 years down the line, it may be difficult for employers to obtain the relevant records, which are often destroyed after a few years. This could in turn affect any negotiating power they may have and cost them more in settlement or damages. It will also effect forward planning in terms of having a company budget for prospective litigation, as well as the extra costs of retaining and storing staff records for 6 years. The worst case scenario for employers could be a tsunami of retrospective claims which could seriously de-rail smaller companies' finances and even lead to staff lay-offs, which would certainly be darkly ironic.

In a related development, following on from Lord Davies report 'Women on Boards' published in February 2012, which recommended that FTSE companies should aim to have 25% of their boards composed of women by 2015, the rightful furore has reached the hallowed halls of the European Union.

The EU has proposed a Directive that would make it mandatory for Members States to ensure that 40% of all boardrooms are composed of female directors, with eye-watering sanctions for those who do not comply. This has been inspired in part by similar national laws in various Scandinavian countries, such as Norway, who have gallantly led the troops in the battle for all-encompassing gender equality in western society.

However, there has been substantial resistance, including from the UK, with many arguing that the measure will be too expensive and difficult to enforce for some less sophisticated Member States. Moreover, some female commentators have pointed out that the quotas do not address the real issue, which is often loss of female talent due to glass ceilings or family commitments. Thus, the real challenge may lie in employers removing barriers or offering more flexible working alternatives.

This resistance has led to the EU announcing that it is to postpone the vote on the Directive, which was mooted to take place in October 2012, and has extended the time for the enlivened debate to be heard in November 2012. Either way, this small delay does not represent a fatal re-routing of the path to the New World that awaits.

The Suffragettes would certainly be proud of the recent progress in equality of the sexes in the workplace, however, as with all movements for justified change, the cultures of old will need to be shaken and new thought given by employers to how this changed landscape will flourish for all, as it surely should.

No comments:

Post a Comment