The ECJ’s judgment on 3.10.06 in the Cadman case on equal pay for women and men has caused much confusion.
The Times headline is "Mothers Lose Right to Equal Salaries" while The Guardian says "Higher Pay for Long Service Ruled Illegal". So just what is the truth?
As ever, the ECJ gave a very short judgment. In essence, and in line with their earlier ruling in the Danfoss case (in 1989), the ECJ ruled that an employer does not generally have to produce specific proof that paying experienced workers more money is justified because they perform their duties better. So in general they allow employers freedom to use length of service as a criterion in pay scales without fear of sex discrimination claims although women generally have shorter service with an employer than men. But we have to remember the case is only concerned with equal pay between the sexes and since 1st October 2006 the UK has brought anti-age discrimination laws into effect to comply with a different EU equal
