Men England has lost an equal pay claim brought by a senior employee who was paid £14,000 less than a male colleague.
Quantity surveyor (QS) Jennifer Owen joined the agency in November 2020 on a salary of £51,258 per annum, the minimum of her salary band. He was told he could not negotiate a higher salary within the band.
Five months earlier, a QS man, Thomas Birch, was hired to carry out a similar job on a salary of £65,000, having successfully negotiated a salary at the top end of the salary range.
According to Homes England, there had been a change in policy regarding the level within the band that new recruits could be given in the second half of 2020.
However, employment judge Nicholas Roper said in an employment tribunal judgment that there was no written evidence of this.
“The respondent’s rather vague evidence on this point was that the policy change had been decreed verbally by the HR department and that managers were now encouraged to hire at the lowest level for the band,” he to say.
In April 2022, Owen was promoted to become regional program manager and was given an additional responsibility allowance of 10 per cent, taking her salary to £56,383 a year.
After the role change, Birch reported to Owen but continued to earn £65,000 a year, £9,000 more than her.
Owen became aware of the pay gap in November 2021 and complained to Homes England. She was repeatedly told that correct policies were in place at the time of their respective hires and that there was no gender discrimination in salaries in the organization.
In October 2022, her job was reclassified and her salary increased to £62,022, while her legal claim for equal pay remained lodged.
Men England told the court that men in similar specialist roles earned an average of £50,874, while women earned £52,188.
Judge Roper, however, noted that Owen’s case did not argue for broader discrimination against women by the agency.
He said that under the Equality Act 2010 it was for Homes England to prove what material factor it cited for paying Owen less than Birch.
“It is not clear what the defendant’s material factor defense is with respect to this decision,” he said in the ruling, adding that the government housing accelerator “simply failed” to provide evidence of the difference
Homes England was ordered to pay Owen £24,000, which consisted of £19,000 in back pay, plus interest and a compensatory increase.
