The 1970 Equal Pay Act
The year 1970 marked the first institutional changes regarding wage equality. The 1970 Equal Pay Act states that equivalent work equals equivalent pay, regardless of gender, unless employers can prove that a difference in pay is due to material differences not gender differences. The Act also prohibits differentiation of holidays, pension rights, and bonuses based on gender (Moss 2015). Although seemingly straightforward, the Act ran into many issues, especially regarding “the circumstances in which an employer is required to provide objective justification for a difference in pay by reference to the principle of proportionality” (Steele 2010). Conley reasons that the tensions between the courts and the trade unions can …show more content…
Steele explains that direct discrimination occurs when the sex of the employee is the defining cause of the difference in pay. Indirect sex discrimination happens either by showing that a provision, criterion, or practice (PCP) is placed on both men and women, but puts women at a disadvantage. In addition, indirect sex discrimination exists when it can be shown that an predominantly female group is paid less than a predominantly male group for doing equal work, “where the statistics for the gender composition of the group are significant” (Steele 2010). The court has the ability to interpret the Act, which sets powerful forms of case law and precedent.
In the court case of Enderby v. Frenchay Health Authority (1994), one can really see the divergence between collective bargaining and the courts. A female speech therapist made a claim against her employer, stating she was getting paid 40% less than her male counterparts, who were clinical psychologists and pharmacists (Steele 2010). The United Kingdom judicial body in charge of this case, the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT), concluded that the …show more content…
The Act was successful by removing institutionalized belief that male wages were ‘family’ wages, while female wages were ‘single’ wages. It struck out differential wage rates, which meant that there were two seperate rates: one lower generally received by females, and one higher received by males. Ultimately, the Act successfully introduced a single wage rate. Tzannatos notes that on average, pay had increased for married women by 19%. Although there were small successes with the Equal Pay Act, the United Kingdom was still performing worse than other countries like Sweden, who had started introducing ‘parental’ leave on top of ‘maternal’ leave for pregnancy and childcare (Tzannatos 1987). The Equal Pay Act 1970 achievement was the single wage rate, but with the courts judging all the cases so conservatively, there was not any radical changes towards
The year 1970 marked the first institutional changes regarding wage equality. The 1970 Equal Pay Act states that equivalent work equals equivalent pay, regardless of gender, unless employers can prove that a difference in pay is due to material differences not gender differences. The Act also prohibits differentiation of holidays, pension rights, and bonuses based on gender (Moss 2015). Although seemingly straightforward, the Act ran into many issues, especially regarding “the circumstances in which an employer is required to provide objective justification for a difference in pay by reference to the principle of proportionality” (Steele 2010). Conley reasons that the tensions between the courts and the trade unions can …show more content…
Steele explains that direct discrimination occurs when the sex of the employee is the defining cause of the difference in pay. Indirect sex discrimination happens either by showing that a provision, criterion, or practice (PCP) is placed on both men and women, but puts women at a disadvantage. In addition, indirect sex discrimination exists when it can be shown that an predominantly female group is paid less than a predominantly male group for doing equal work, “where the statistics for the gender composition of the group are significant” (Steele 2010). The court has the ability to interpret the Act, which sets powerful forms of case law and precedent.
In the court case of Enderby v. Frenchay Health Authority (1994), one can really see the divergence between collective bargaining and the courts. A female speech therapist made a claim against her employer, stating she was getting paid 40% less than her male counterparts, who were clinical psychologists and pharmacists (Steele 2010). The United Kingdom judicial body in charge of this case, the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT), concluded that the …show more content…
The Act was successful by removing institutionalized belief that male wages were ‘family’ wages, while female wages were ‘single’ wages. It struck out differential wage rates, which meant that there were two seperate rates: one lower generally received by females, and one higher received by males. Ultimately, the Act successfully introduced a single wage rate. Tzannatos notes that on average, pay had increased for married women by 19%. Although there were small successes with the Equal Pay Act, the United Kingdom was still performing worse than other countries like Sweden, who had started introducing ‘parental’ leave on top of ‘maternal’ leave for pregnancy and childcare (Tzannatos 1987). The Equal Pay Act 1970 achievement was the single wage rate, but with the courts judging all the cases so conservatively, there was not any radical changes towards