More than 3,500 Next shop workers suffer blow in Next equal pay victory

More than 3,500 Next shop workers suffer blow in Next equal pay victory A judge had ruled that Next was justified in paying warehouse workers more than those in its branches Fashion giant Next has won a "landmark" equal pay claim brought by more than 3,500 of its shop workers. An employment judge ruled the retailer had "sound business reasons" for paying warehouse staff more than those who work in its branches. Lawyers for those behind the claim - which covered a period between 2012 and 2023 and covered current and former workers - said that because shop workers were mostly female and warehouse staff were mostly male, the difference in pay amounted to a form of sex discrimination. In August 2024, the tribunal found that there was no direct discrimination, but that it was "not reasonably necessary" for Next to pay warehouse staff the higher rate to meet its aim of saving costs. However, this was overturned at the Employment Appeal Tribunal, with a judge finding that Next's reason for the difference was justifiable. Mr Justice Bourne said in a judgment: "Next paid a higher market rate for warehouse work because of recruitment and retention factors which did not apply to the retail workers. Therefore this was not a case of simply paying more for what was perceived by the market as typically men's work." He also said the average gender split of retail workers was 77.5% female and 22.5% male, while in warehouses, it was 47.22% female and 52.78% male. The judge added: "Next paid the rates to warehouse staff which it needed to pay for sound business reasons, and no more, and those business reasons did not apply to the retail staff." A spokesperson for Next described the decision as "a victory for common sense" and said a contrary ruling "would have represented a hammer blow to retail employment in the UK". The retailer, led by Tory peer boss Lord Wolfson, said: "Had the judgment gone against Next, it would have created a threat to the ongoing viability of many of our stores. It would also have had the perverse effect of putting retailers who operate their own warehousing at a material disadvantage to competitors who contract out their warehouse operations, which makes no sense." Lord Wolfson previously warned an equal pay victory for its mostly female store staff could force it to close shops. Speaking in 2024, he raised the risk while at the same time revealing the company was on track to rake in almost £1billion in annual profit. Elizabeth George, a partner at Leigh Day who was representing the retail workers, described the decision as "disappointing". She said: "Next pays market rates in both its stores and its warehouses in order to recruit and retain staff. "The market rate is higher in the predominantly male warehouse labour market, even though the work carried out in stores has already been found to be equal work. "If an employer need only show it pays the market rates to justify pay discrimination, the very market conditions that give rise to the discrimination then become the legal justification. While the store staff and their legal team welcome many aspects of this appeal judgment, we respectfully disagree with this approach to justification. We remain confident in our clients' position and intend to appeal." [Image text:] NEXT COSTACOFFEE NEXT COSTA COFFEE NEXT TX3I4 NEXT VICTORIA'SSECRET COSTACOFFEE