Mr M Todd, counsel For the v Mr R Katz, Litigation Consultant — 2024

The claimant was employed by Flixmedia Ltd as a Project Manager from 2016 and, on the tribunal's finding, was formally promoted to Product Manager in April 2021 by a contractual addendum signed by RK and a contemporaneous email referring to her role as Product Manager. The tribunal rejected the respondent's case that the PM title had been a mistake. The claimant discovered in February 2022 that Liam Garvin was paid £25,000 more, raised a grievance about equal pay in June 2022, and the respondent then carried out a Matrix assessment of her role. That assessment concluded on 21 September 2022 that she was meeting the expectations of a Junior Product Manager but was not yet performing at PM level.

The equal pay claim failed. The tribunal found that the claimant's work and Garvin's work were broadly similar, but accepted that Garvin had been recruited for a more experienced and more strategic data-focused role. It held that the differences were not of practical importance and that the respondent had established a genuine material factor explaining the pay difference. The tribunal noted that it was not in a position to judge whether the respondent was objectively entitled to value the experience it sought when recruiting Garvin. The direct and indirect sex discrimination claims, and the race and religion or belief discrimination claims, were withdrawn by the claimant and were not determined on the merits.

One victimisation claim succeeded. The tribunal held that the claimant was not invited to the 3 August 2022 roadmap meeting because of her protected act in bringing the equal pay grievance, and that the respondent could not discharge the burden of showing that this was not materially because of that protected act. The other victimisation claim failed because the tribunal found that the Matrix assessment process had been underway before the grievance and that the protected act in June 2022 did not make a materially causative difference to the decision communicated on 21 September 2022.

The constructive unfair dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal rejected allegations that the grievance and appeal processes were unfair and found that those processes were handled fairly and diligently. However, it held that the unilateral change of the claimant's title from Product Manager to Junior Product Manager, following a process designed to reassess and potentially increase her salary, was a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The tribunal accepted that the change had the effect of an effective demotion and that the claimant resigned promptly for that reason. The parties later agreed remedy, and the respondent was ordered to pay a basic award of £2,855, a compensatory award of £44,645, and £1,000 for injury to feelings, making a total award of £48,500.