JPP Law Blog
Woman placed on higher grade loses appeal over pay rises
A woman who was put on a higher pay grade as a way of protecting her salary following a job re-evaluation did not have an automatic right to be receive future increases.
She was therefore not entitled to the benefit of a pay increase intended only for posts that were properly categorised as being at that grade.
That was the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of a woman who had worked for her local authority for more than 20 years.
In 1999, the authority introduced a new nine-grade pay structure as part of a job evaluation scheme, which found that her post had been over-valued. It was categorised as a "grade 8" post in the new structure. Because the employee's salary exceeded the maximum payable in grade 8, the local authority created a "personal grade" for her and placed her at 9.37.
She remained in her post and reached grade 9.38 in 2000. It was made clear to her that she had then reached the highest salary point possible in that post, because that equated to the highest point she could have reached in that post under the old system.
In 2004, salary levels for grade 9 posts were increased but were not applied to her.
In 2005 she retired and claimed that, under the final salary pension scheme, her pension should be calculated on the basis of what her salary would have been had she received the 2004 increase.
The case went all the way to the Court of Appeal, which ruled against her. It held that the local authority was clearly right. The terms of her contract did not entitle her to pay increases intended for grade 9 posts. If they did, she would have received an unjustified pay increase in 2004 unrelated to the value of her post, and that would have been more than the pay protection she had been contractually promised.
Please contact us if you would like more information about the issues raised in this article. To find out more about JPP's employment law services please visit employment law.
JPP Law Blog

- Case Studies and Reviews (9)
- Commercial Law (90)
- Dispute Resolution (27)
- Employment Law (118)
- Intellectual Property (2)
- Start-ups (21)
- Videos (8)
- 2021 March (1)
- 2021 February (1)
- 2021 January (1)
- 2020 December (1)
- 2020 November (2)
- 2020 October (2)
- 2020 September (2)
- 2020 August (1)
- 2020 July (3)
- 2020 June (1)
- 2020 May (3)
- 2020 April (1)
- 2020 March (2)
- 2020 February (2)
- 2020 January (2)
- 2019 December (2)
- 2019 October (1)
- 2019 September (5)
- 2019 July (3)
- 2019 June (2)
- 2019 May (2)
- 2019 April (3)
- 2019 March (2)
- 2019 February (2)
- 2019 January (2)
- 2018 December (2)
- 2018 October (4)
- 2018 September (12)
- 2018 February (6)
- 2018 January (7)
- 2017 December (2)
- 2018 July (14)
- 2018 June (2)
- 2018 May (13)
- 2018 April (8)
- 2018 March (11)
- 2017 November (6)
- 2017 October (12)
- 2017 September (14)
- 2017 July (7)
- 2017 June (10)
- 2017 May (6)
- 2017 April (4)
- 2017 March (11)
- 2017 February (6)
- 2017 January (1)
- 2016 December (2)
- 2016 September (4)
- 2016 July (1)