Ms S Yildiz v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and 1 other — 2021

This was a two-day preliminary hearing on comparator status in an equal pay case brought by Ms S Yildiz against the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and Ms F Taylor. The tribunal heard evidence from the claimant and Ms Taylor and considered the shared services arrangements with Thurrock Borough Council, the Be First corporate structure, and the shareholder and service agreements governing Be First.

The tribunal held that the claimant could not compare herself with Mr David Lawson under s.79 Equality Act 2010. It rejected the argument that the shared services arrangement made LBBD and Thurrock associated employers for s.79 purposes, finding that employees remained employed by their original authority, that terms and conditions were not harmonised, and that the emails relied on did not show assimilation. The tribunal also rejected reliance on central government control over local authorities.

The tribunal further held that the claimant could not compare herself with the Be First comparators under s.79 because the claimant’s base and the comparators’ base were different establishments and the relevant premises were physically and legally separate. It found that Be First had its own management structure, and that the shared working arrangements did not make the two groups part of the same establishment for s.79.

However, the tribunal accepted the claimant’s Article 157 argument in relation to the Be First comparators. Applying the single source analysis drawn from Lawrence, Potter, Robertson, Asda and the Teckal context, it held that LBBD had the practical legal ability as 100% shareholder to influence Be First pay strategy and could restore equal treatment through its strategic control, business plan powers and power to appoint or remove directors. The judgment recorded that a further stage 1 equal value hearing would still be needed before any substantive equal pay issues could be determined.