The Next equal pay case has taken another significant turn. Going back to 2018, thousands of shopfloor staff brought discrimination claims over a gender pay gap with warehouse colleagues. The initial Employment Tribunal ruled in their favour, but a recent Employment Appeal Tribunal has overturned a key part of the decision.

Below, we examine the background to the equal pay ruling and why this decision wasn’t upheld on appeal. We then explore what the Next claim could mean for employees going forward, and the steps those affected can take.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding your own pay rights, contact Redmans Solicitors for expert employment advice. Following a quick chat, our team of specialists can assess your case and discuss your possible next steps.

It only takes a moment to learn how we could help you, simply:

• Give us a call directly on 020 3397 3603
• Request a callback by completing our online form with your details

What Happened in the Next Equal Pay Case?

Back in August 2024, an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruled that Next had indirectly discriminated against shopfloor staff by paying them differently to warehouse workers. Notably, while shopfloor workers were predominantly women, the warehouse workforce had more men.

Next argued the pay difference was due to “market rates,” but the ET rejected this. While it accepted that no conscious decision to discriminate had occurred, it found the practice constituted indirect discrimination because no sufficient business reason was provided to justify the disparity.

Why Did the Employment Appeal Tribunal Overturn the Next Claim?

At the time of the initial equal pay ruling, this was seen as a significant win for the shopfloor staff. More than 6,000 workers eventually brought similar claims, alleging they’d faced indirect sex discrimination due to a gender pay gap.

However, the retailer wasn’t done. The Next equal pay case was then brought before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The retailer argued that it did, in fact, have a sufficient business reason for paying warehouse staff differently to those in its stores. This was because “recruitment and retention factors” meant market rates for warehouse workers were higher, a pressure simply not faced by shop floor staff.

Read More: Pregnancy Job Discrimination: Worker Told “Nobody Wants to See a Pregnant Woman”

Following the proceedings, the EAT upheld Next’s claim. It ruled that the initial ET had erred in its judgment, as it hadn’t correctly considered how the recruitment and retention pressures provided a sufficient business reason for the different pay rates.

Next were obviously happy with the decision, with a spokesperson stating that the ruling was “not only correct in law, but also a victory for common sense.” The legal representation for the Claimants, however, called the conclusion “disappointing.” It added that warehouse staff, who were in an alleged male-dominated labour market, being paid more without any justification other than “market rates,” made the rates themselves discriminatory. With this in mind, it said it intends to appeal the decision.

What Does the Next Equal Pay Claim Mean for Employees?

While the Next equal pay case is likely to rumble on as the Claimants appeal the recent ruling, the EAT’s judgment carries significant weight in the meantime. Prior to this judgment, shopfloor staff may have thought they had a claim if the only reason they were paid less than a warehouse colleague was “market rates.” However, following the EAT’s judgment, “market rates” could now be a sufficient justification, even if a gender pay gap exists.

That said, employees need to understand the specifics of this ruling carefully. Simply labelling a pay discrepancy as a difference in market rates isn’t likely to be enough. In the Next claim, a sufficient business justification for the wage difference arose from “recruitment and retention factors.”

Next argued that to attract and retain warehouse talent, it had to pay these enhanced rates. Workers in its stores, meanwhile, were not in short supply, meaning such recruitment pressures and the consequent need to offer enhanced pay rates didn’t exist. Therefore, while employers may be entitled to offer workers in similar roles different pay rates, they must still have a sufficient justification for doing so.

What Can I Do if My Employment Rights Have Been Breached?

If someone believes they’ve faced indirect sex discrimination at work, it’s essential they act quickly. While there’s no guarantee a case will reach an Employment Tribunal, strict time limits apply if legal action is required.

Before deciding what route to take, it’s recommended to gather evidence to support one’s case. In the case of indirect discrimination, this could include workplace policies, employment contracts or written correspondence, among other things.

Once evidence has been gathered, the next step is usually via internal dispute resolution. Depending on the facts of the case, speaking informally with HR or raising a formal grievance may be appropriate. Either way, if a resolution can be found at this stage, the stress and costs associated with legal action can be avoided.

Read More: Supreme Court Widens Protection for Part-Time Workers

Unfortunately, there may be circumstances where internal avenues fail to provide a satisfactory outcome. If this is the case, the next step often involves initiating early conciliation through Acas. This free and independent process is required before most claims can be brought and offers another chance to resolve the matter informally.

If all else fails, though, a claim can be brought before the Employment Tribunal. Strict eligibility criteria and time limits must be met to proceed, but if successful, compensation could be awarded.

In any case, it’s recommended to obtain specialist legal advice before making a decision on how to proceed. Doing so ensures one’s legal position is completely clear and the best course of action is taken.

Get Help with Redmans

If you have any concerns regarding the gender pay gap or think you’ve been indirectly discriminated against, contact Redmans Solicitors. Our team of employment specialists is here to help. Following a brief consultation, we can assess your case, answer your questions and provide expert advice. For those eligible, we can also guide you through any relevant legal process.

To proceed, please:

• Phone us on 020 3397 3603
• Request a callback via our online form