Lawyers for Tesco shop workers have praised a Court of Appeal decision that upholds the way employment tribunals assess the work carried out by store staff and distribution centre employees in the long‑running equal pay dispute.
They said the ruling marks a meaningful step towards improving access to justice in large, complex equal pay cases, though Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing cautioned that a final outcome remains still a long way off.
The Court of Appeal rejected Tesco’s challenge to the tribunal’s method for establishing the job facts of customer assistants and warehouse operatives as part of the equal value assessment.
The decision comes as the employment tribunal continues to hear Tesco’s defence, in which the supermarket seeks to justify paying predominantly female store workers less than mainly male distribution centre staff.
Law firm Leigh Day, which represents more than 16,000 shop workers, argues that Tesco cannot legitimately rely on so‑called market rates to explain the pay difference.
A key issue before the appeal court was Tesco’s attempt to stop the tribunal from using the organisation’s own training materials and operational documents to determine what tasks customer assistants and warehouse operatives were expected to perform.
The Court of Appeal upheld the tribunal’s approach, noting that Tesco operates in a tightly regulated sector, uses advanced digital stock systems, and maintains detailed training resources to ensure consistent working practices across its stores.
It accepted that Tesco had a strong business need for both roles to be carried out uniformly throughout the organisation, and agreed that the tribunal was entitled to treat Tesco’s training materials as evidence of what the organisation required staff to do unless there was clear proof otherwise.
The judgment stated: “An important benefit of the approach taken by the employment tribunal is that it conforms to the reality of the way in which remuneration is determined in a business like Tesco’s and is thus more likely to produce a result which can be applied to the claimants as a group and to produce a workable outcome if the claims succeed.”
According to Leigh Day solicitors, the ruling is significant because it rejects efforts to require thousands of claimants to prove every detail of their work on an individual basis.
Kiran Daurka, employment partner at Leigh Day, said: “The Court of Appeal has recognised the importance of removing unnecessary hurdles that prevent everyday people from accessing justice in complex equal pay litigation. This judgment is a welcome clarification that, in large-scale cases involving sophisticated respondents like Tesco and other large retailers, tribunals can take a practical and proportionate approach to assessing jobs, which then mitigates against unnecessary complexity to delay or obstruct claims.
“Our clients have always maintained that these cases should focus on the reality of the work being done, not on creating artificial barriers that make equal pay claims impossible to pursue. This ruling will help future claims progress in a more streamlined and accessible way.”
The judgment also repeated concerns about Tesco’s handling of evidence, including the quality and presentation of witness material relied upon during the proceedings.
It further advised that tribunals dealing with large equal pay cases may, where appropriate, assess roles in a more generalised way rather than requiring an overly individualised examination of each claim.
Personnel Today has contacted Tesco for comment.
This article is based on a piece written for Personnel Today
