ARTICLE · 18 MAY 2006

Amery in the High Court: Equal Pay for Equal Value

Clayton Utz

Explore more from Clayton Utz

The plaintiffs in Amery argued that, as casual teachers, they were unable to access higher increment levels while performing work of equal value, and that they had been discriminated against on the basis of sex.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Hedy Meggiorin

Author LinkedIn connections

Key Point

The plaintiffs in Amery argued that, as casual teachers, they were unable to access higher increment levels while performing work of equal value, and that they had been discriminated against on the basis of sex.

In November 2005, the High Court heard an appeal from the NSW Court of Appeal's decision in Amery where it upheld a finding of the Appeal Panel of the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal that the Department had indirectly discriminated against a number of long-term female casual teachers by denying them access to a more beneficial pay scale for permanent teachers.

Last week the High Court handed down its decision, effectively overturning the decision of the Court of Appeal and finding that the Department had not indirectly discriminated against the casual teachers. This article revisits some of the issues arising in Amery and, in particular, highlights the often complex jurisdiction of indirect discrimination.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

A Timely Reminder: Court Continues The Trend Of Focusing On The Importance Of Statutory Timeframes

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

When Workplace Material Causes Psychiatric Injury: Secretary Department Of Communities And Justice v Soulos [2026] NSWCA 185

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Carroll & O'Dea

What Do The Employment Relations Act Reforms Mean For Your Business?

AustraliaEmployment and HR

A Tale Of Two Gates: The Limits Of A Head Contractor’s Duty Of Care

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Fair Work Commission Strictly Enforces 21-day Filing Deadline

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

Comparative Guide

Employee Incentives

Comparative Guide

Technology Outsourcing

See more popular content from

Employment and HR

New Minimum Wage Rates Gain Effect In Australia Today

The Australian Government has raised the National Minimum Wage and Minimum Award Wages effective July 1, 2026, with weekly rates increasing from $948.00 to $1,004.90 and hourly rates from $24.95 to $26.44. What compliance actions must employers take to avoid penalties for underpayment, and how do these changes affect different worker categories including trainees, apprentices, and entry-level employees?

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Lexplosion Solutions Private Limited

What is an employment separation certificate and when do I need to provide one?

When terminating an employee, employers must provide an employment separation certificate upon request.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

When Workplace Material Causes Psychiatric Injury: Secretary Department Of Communities And Justice v Soulos [2026] NSWCA 185

A recent NSW Court of Appeal decision highlights both the scope of an employer’s duty to guard against reasonably foreseeable psychiatric injury and the importance of the way issues are framed and concessions made during litigation.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Carroll & O'Dea

Reforms To Restraints: What The Competition And Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Banning Unfair Non-Competes) Bill 2026 Means For Employers

The Albanese Government has released draft legislation that would fundamentally reshape how Australian employers use restrictive covenants and competitive agreements. The proposed Competition and Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Banning Unfair Non-Competes) Bill 2026 seeks to prohibit or strictly regulate no-poach agreements, wage-fixing arrangements, non-compete clauses, and co-worker non-solicitation terms.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Fair Work Commission Releases New AI Guidance And Warns Against Blind Reliance On AI

The Fair Work Commission has introduced new guidance requiring parties to disclose their use of generative AI in proceedings, following a 70% surge in workload attributed to AI-generated applications. A recent case demonstrates the consequences of blind reliance on AI tools, with one applicant ordered to pay costs after continuing a jurisdictionally flawed claim despite repeated warnings from the Commission.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Holding Redlich

Who Signs The Termination Letter Matters – The Importance Of The Decision-maker

The Full Federal Court's decision in Totino v Metro Trains Melbourne clarifies how employers can successfully defend general protections claims when dismissing employees who have made workplace complaints or workers compensation claims. The case establishes critical principles about who must give evidence, the distinction between advisers and decision-makers, and why proper documentation of the decision-making process is essential for employers facing the reverse burden of proof.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Bartier Perry Solicitors

Proposed Ban On Non-Compete Clauses.

The Australian Government has released draft legislation proposing to ban non-compete clauses for workers earning below the Fair Work Act high-income threshold, currently $190,100 per year. The reforms are not yet law and are intended to commence in 2027, subject to legislation passing Parliament.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

HHG Legal Group

AI Wearables In The Workplace: What Employers Need To Know

This article examines the rise of AI wearables—particularly AI-enabled smart glasses—in the workplace, covering both employer-driven use cases (such as logistics, healthcare, and remote operations) and employee-driven use (including accessibility, personal devices brought to work and covert recording).

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

A Tale Of Two Gates: The Limits Of A Head Contractor’s Duty Of Care

In Stathakis v Richard Crookes Constructions Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1113, the NSW Supreme Court entered a verdict and judgment for the defendant against the plaintiff’s unsuccessful negligence claim finding that the defendant, as the head contractor of the site on which the plaintiff sustained injury, did discharge the duty of care it owed.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Injured While Working As A Delivery Driver? New Protections For Gig Workers.

New minimum standards effective from 17 August 2026 introduce personal accident insurance requirements for delivery drivers and riders working through digital platforms like Uber Eats and Deliveroo. These protections address a critical gap for gig economy workers who, as independent contractors, have historically fallen outside traditional workers compensation schemes when injured on the job.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Carroll & O'Dea