The next step

To the Court of Appeal's ruling in the case mentioned in the article

[Weblink]

Part timers, parity of hours and pay

Facts of the case

Mrs Pinaud (P) was employed by British Airways (BA) as a part-time purser. Under BA’s part-time rota system, she was on duty for 14 days and then off duty for the next 14 days. During her 14 day on duty period, P was required to work ten of those days. This meant that P was available for work for 130 days overall each year.

Comparable full timer

P had a full-time comparator employee. A comparator can be any individual who does the same or a broadly similar role as the part timer on a full-time basis. They must be employed under the same type of contract as the part timer on either a permanent or fixed-term basis. P’s full-time comparator at BA worked a rota of six days on and three days off. This equated to a total of 243 working days per annum. But when it came to pay there was a disparity.

The central issue

P worked 53.5%, not 50%, of her full-time comparator’s working hours but only received 50% of that employee’s pay. In other words, the full-timer was paid more money for doing less work. P raised an internal grievance alleging less favourable treatment under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 . These Regulations state that a part-time worker has the right not to be treated less favourably than a comparable full-time worker with regards to the terms of their contract. They should also not be subject to any detriment because of their part-time status.

Court of Appeal

BA rejected P’s grievance and her subsequent internal appeal. She then won a claim at the tribunal for breach of the Regulations. BA appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (where it also lost) and then to the Court of Appeal.

It has now ruled that the disparity in pay for hours worked was a breach of the Regulations. In its view, P ought to have received 53.5% of the comparable full timer’s pay - not 50% - as she worked 53.5% of their hours (see The next step ).

Back to the tribunal

This case has been remitted to a fresh tribunal on a technicality, but it does raise an important point: a part-time employee must have parity in pay with a comparable full timer.

Tip 1. The only time this rule does not apply is if the employer can objectively justify the less favourable treatment, i.e. the disparity. In reality, this is incredibly difficult to do and few employers who face this type of claim are successful.

Tip 2. If you have a part-time employee who works the pro rata hours of a comparable full timer, you must ensure that they receive the correct percentage of equivalent pay - even if BA wins its technicality argument, this fact won’t change. Don’t rely on rough calculations; work hours and pay out to the pound and penny.

For the Court of Appeal’s ruling in this case, visit http://tipsandadvice-personnel.co.uk/download (PS 21.01.07).