Skip to content

Brought to you by

Dentons logo in black and white

UK People Reward and Mobility Hub

The latest updates in employment, benefits, pensions and immigration

open menu close menu

UK People Reward and Mobility Hub

  • Home
  • Events and training
  • Who We Are
    • Meet the team
  • How we can help

Contract workers and indirect discrimination – the importance of the right comparators!

By Christopher Seymour
June 16, 2023
  • Atypical workers
  • Compensation
  • Contractors
  • Discrimination
  • Employee welfare
  • Employment policies
  • General
  • Low Paid Workers
  • Pay, benefits and bonuses
  • Tribunal claims
  • TUPE/outsourcing
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn

On 5 May 2023, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) handed down its judgment in Boohene and others v. Royal Parks Limited. The appeal considered whether, under section 41 of the Equality Act 2010, workers employed by third party contractors could rely on the organisation’s own employees as comparators in a claim of indirect discrimination regarding rates of pay. The decision highlights the importance in indirect discrimination claims of correctly identifying the provision, criterion or practice (PCP) complained about and the right pool of people against which the effect of the PCP should be compared.  

Facts

The Respondent had a policy of paying its employees the London Living Wage (LLW), a voluntary pay rate set by the Living Wage Foundation. The claimants, who worked for a contractor providing cleaning services to the Respondent, did not receive the LLW.

The outsourced workers claimed that the Respondent’s policy of paying the LLW to its directly employed workers, but not to them, was a PCP and was indirectly discriminatory.  This was because it had a detrimental impact on those from black and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds, who were more likely to work for contractors.

Decision

At first instance, the Employment Tribunal (ET) agreed that the PCP placed BAME workers at a disadvantage and that the Respondent’s decision not to require that contract workers were paid the LLW could not be justified.

That decision was overturned by the EAT, which allowed Royal Parks’ appeal and found that there was no indirect discrimination. The ET had misidentified the pool for comparison and narrowed it without justification. The EAT held that the ET should have made comparisons with a pool of all outsourced contract workers, rather than only comparing the directly employed workers and the Claimants. Ultimately, when analysing the impact of a PCP, the pool being considered should consist of the entire group it affects.

What does this mean for employers?

When identifying comparator pools for the purpose of considering whether a PCP constitutes indirect discrimination, it is important to be wary of drawing the pool too narrowly and thereby comparing the wrong groups. In this case, the appeal was allowed because the ET should have compared directly employed staff with all outsourced workers, rather than just those on the cleaning contract. In this case, when considered against this wider pool, it was found that the decision not to pay the LLW was not discriminatory.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share via email Share on LinkedIn
Subscribe and stay updated
Receive our latest blog posts by email.
Stay in Touch
Atypical Workers, contractors, Discrimination, employee welfare, employment policies, general, Low Paid Workers, Pay, Pay benefits and bonuses, Tribunal claims, TUPE, Workers Compensation
Christopher Seymour

About Christopher Seymour

All posts

You might also like...

  • Equal Pay
  • Equality Act
  • Pay, benefits and bonuses

Equal pay: the state of play in the UK

By Kate Coppack
  • Discrimination
  • Employment policies
  • Unfair dismissal

EAT upholds different conclusions on same policy in age discrimination cases

By Sarah Lovell
  • Compensation
  • Legislative Changes
  • Tribunal procedures
  • Unfair dismissal

Increase in limits

This week new limits applying to certain awards of employment tribunals, and other amounts payable under employment legislation, have been […]

By Verity Buckingham

About Dentons

Across over 80 countries, Dentons helps you grow, protect, operate and finance your organization by providing uniquely global and deeply local legal solutions. Polycentric, purpose-driven and committed to inclusion, diversity, equity and sustainability, we focus on what matters most to you. www.dentons.com

Grow, Protect, Operate, Finance. Dentons, the law firm of the future is here. Copyright 2023 Dentons. Dentons is a global legal practice providing client services worldwide through its member firms and affiliates. Please see dentons.com for Legal notices.

Categories

Dentons logo in black and white

© 2023 Dentons

  • Legal notices
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of use
  • Cookies on this site