Mr S Alasheni v Greater Glasgow Health Board — 2020

The claimant was employed by the respondent as a Safety Operative and claimed back pay at Band 3 level for a period before the respondent backdated his upgraded pay. He relied on alleged comparisons with posts at other NHS bodies and named comparators within the respondent's organisation, including both male and female employees, and said they did the same or broadly similar work, work rated as equivalent, or work of equal value.

The respondent applied to strike out the claim, arguing that even taking the claimant's case at its highest it did not disclose an equal pay claim with reasonable prospects of success. The Tribunal noted that the claimant compared himself with male and female comparators without distinction and had stated that his equal pay complaint was not based on sex, but on equal pay regardless of a range of protected characteristics.

The Tribunal found that the claim was a general complaint about perceived inequality in pay rather than a claim that any difference in pay was on the grounds of sex. It held that, because a successful equal pay claim required sex to be the reason for the difference in pay, the claim had no reasonable prospects of success and struck it out under Rule 37(1)(a). The Tribunal therefore did not consider the alternative application for a deposit order.