There are three ways for a claimant to show that their work is equal to that of their comparator – if they are engaged on "like work", "work rated as equivalent" under a job evaluation scheme or "work of equal value".
The claimant must be doing the same or broadly similar work to that of their comparator. A Tribunal is unlikely to decide that the claimant is doing like work if there are significant differences such as different duties, greater responsibility or greater physical effort. But Tribunals will look closely at extra duties stipulated in a comparator's job description to ascertain whether or not they are actually being done.
The claimant's and comparator's jobs must be rated the same under a job evaluation scheme carried out by the employer. This measures the demands made on the two workers under headings such as effort, skill and decision making. The job evaluation scheme must be free from discrimination and must be analytical.
These claims are the most difficult to assess. In the absence of a job evaluation scheme, the Tribunal has to decide whether the claimant's and the comparator's jobs are of equal value. Normally Tribunals ask an independent expert to do an evaluation of the two jobs. This is similar to a job evaluation done by an employer but the independent expert only looks at the job of the claimant and the comparator. Employees cannot bring equal value claims if the two jobs have been properly rated in a discriminatory analytical job evaluation scheme. Their route to a claim is by a work rated as equivalent claim.
Click the links below for further information on Equal Pay Claims: