EQUAL PAY REMEDIES : Two procedural rules for equal pay claims were challenged as being contrary to Art 119 (now Art 141) in the cases of Levez v Jennings and Preston v Wolverhampton The first rule, s 2(4) of the EqPA, required claims be brought, at the latest, within six months of the termination of employment (‘the qualifying date’). The second rule, s 2(5) of the EqPA, provided that arrears or damages in respect

doi:10.4324/9781843145585-88

Chapter

ABSTRACT

Under the new s 2ZA of the EqPA 1970,175 the general (six month) rule still applies, but with three exceptions. The first (s 2ZA(4)) is where a worker is employed on a series of temporary contracts. Before the amendment, she would have to make a claim in respect of each contract, but now, where the series of contracts could be defined by as ‘stable employment case’, the time limit will not begin to run until the end of the stable employment. The second one (s 2ZA(5)) arises where, for instance, the employer lies about the pay of a comparator (a ‘concealment case’). The qualifying date is six months after the claimant discovered (or ought to have discovered) the truth. This scenario occurred in Levez, below. The third exception (s 2ZA(6)) arises where the woman falls under a disability during the six month period following employment. The qualifying date is six months after she ceased to be under a disability.176 In case of concealment and disability, the qualifying date is the later of those given by sub-ss (5) and (6).