North Lanarkshire Council Equal Pay Claims Dismissed at Employment Appeal Tribunal
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has dismissed an appeal against North Lanarkshire Council in an equal pay dispute, upholding the original Employment Tribunal's judgement.
• public
Equal Pay Claims Against North Lanarkshire Council Rejected
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has dismissed an appeal brought by Ms Heather Brady and others against North Lanarkshire Council, upholding the Employment Tribunal's (ET) original decision in a long-running equal pay case. The judgment, handed down on 15 May 2025, addresses claims arising from job evaluations conducted by the council over several years.
Background to the Dispute
The claimants, represented by Ms Daphne Romney KC, argued that job evaluations carried out by North Lanarkshire Council were unreliable, violating equal pay provisions under the Equality Act 2010. The core issue was whether the ET had reasonable grounds to suspect that the comparator job evaluations were unreliable. The claimants alleged manipulation and bias in the evaluation process, aiming to maintain pay differences between predominantly male and female roles.
Key Tribunal Findings
The original Employment Tribunal found reasonable grounds to suspect the unreliability of 2007 job evaluations for Gardener/Chargehand Gardener and Refuse Collector roles. However, it found no such grounds regarding evaluations for Road Sweeper, Labourer/Storeman (2007), Gardener NLC 3 and 5 (2016), Refuse Collector and Road Sweeper (2016), and Storeman (2019).
Grounds of Appeal and EAT Decision
The claimants challenged the ET's judgment on four grounds:
- Failure to apply the 'one bad apple' principle, arguing that flaws in some evaluations should render all evaluations unreliable.
- Erroneous finding that 2016 re-evaluations for Gardeners, Street Sweepers, and Refuse Collectors were reliable.
- Incorrect assessment of the 2007 Labourer/Storeman evaluation.
- Incorrect assessment of the 2019 Labourer/Storeman re-evaluation.
The EAT, presided over by The Honourable Lady Haldane, rejected all four grounds of appeal. The Tribunal concluded that the 'one bad apple' principle, derived from the case of Hartley v Northumbria NHS Foundation Trust, was not applicable in this instance. The EAT distinguished the present case from Hartley, noting that the former involved a local scheme based on the Scottish Single Status Agreement, unlike the national scheme in Hartley. The EAT also emphasized that the Employment Tribunal was entitled to give more weight to certain evidence, especially regarding witness credibility. The EAT agreed with the ET that the process did not start from a position of manipulation.
Implications of the Decision
This judgment reinforces the importance of robust evidence and credible testimony in equal pay claims. It also clarifies the limitations of the 'one bad apple' principle in the context of local job evaluation schemes. Employers in Scotland may take some comfort from the EAT's upholding of the original decision, particularly where there is no evidence that the underlying system was tainted or that the outcome was the result of manipulation.
Read the entire judgement here: Ms Heather Brady and others v North Lanarkshire Council and others
