--- title: "Shop Floor Staff Lose Their Equal Pay Payout as the Appeal…" canonical: "https://www.metaintro.com/blog/next-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff" language: "en" author: "drashtigarach" published: "2026-09-08T16:43:40.000Z" modified: "2026-09-08T16:43:40.000Z" --- [Back to Blog](/blog) [Salary](/blog/tag/salary)[Jobs](/blog/tag/jobs)[News](/blog/tag/news)[Career](/blog/tag/career) # Shop Floor Staff Lose Their Equal Pay Payout as the Appeal Tribunal Sides With Next More than 3,500 Next store workers, mostly women, were in line for 30 million pounds. The Employment Appeal Tribunal has just overturned the basic pay ruling. [![Drashti Garach](https://cdn.metaintro.com/rs:fill:40:40/q:72/plain/images/5719d740-e510-42bc-8017-e040d145f35f_1766029465094.png)Drashti Garach @DrashtiGarach](/blog/author/drashtigarach) [September 8, 2026](/blog/archive/2026/09)13 min read ![A high bay warehouse pick aisle with an empty pick trolley](https://cdn.metaintro.com/rs:fill:1200:675/q:78/plain/images/10180.jpg) [https://x.com/intent/tweet?text=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff](https://x.com/intent/tweet?text=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff)[http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff](http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff)[https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff&title=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff&title=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next)[mailto:?subject=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&body=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff](mailto:?subject=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&body=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff) The [Employment Appeal Tribunal](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/employment-appeal-tribunal) has overturned the key part of a landmark 2024 equal pay ruling against the retailer Next, a decision [the BBC](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c05r61rqe4yo) reported on 7 September. More than 3,500 current and former staff, mainly women working on the shop floor, had been set to share more than 30 million pounds in back pay after judges found in 2024 that paying warehouse workers a higher basic rate for work of equal value was unlawful. That finding has now been reversed. At [Metaintro](https://www.metaintro.com), we follow pay cases because they set the rules everyone else negotiates inside, and this one just widened what an employer is allowed to call a market rate. ## What Did the Appeal Tribunal Actually Decide? It decided that the gap itself was lawful, not that it did not exist. The 2024 employment tribunal had found that shop floor roles at [Next](https://www.nextplc.co.uk/) were of equal value to warehouse roles, and that paying the warehouse group more in basic hourly pay could not be justified. The appeal tribunal has kept the equal value finding and removed the conclusion that followed from it. The mechanism is a defence in UK equal pay law known as the material factor defence. An employer can lawfully pay two groups differently for work of equal value if it can show the difference is genuinely due to something other than sex. Next argued that something was the labour market, specifically that it faced recruitment and retention pressure for warehouse operatives that it did not face for store staff. The appeal tribunal accepted that argument. Next called the outcome a landmark victory on the key issue of basic pay, and said the judgment confirms employers must be able to pay what is necessary to recruit the people they need without being obliged to raise the pay of other employees where there is no reason to do so. The law firm [Leigh Day](https://www.leighday.co.uk/), which represents the store workers, called the conclusion on basic pay disappointing and confirmed it will appeal. Notably, both the original tribunal and the appeal tribunal found there was no direct sex discrimination in the pay rates. ## Why Does Market Forces Now Beat Equal Value? Because equal value and equal pay are two separate tests, and most people assume they are one. Establishing that two jobs are of equal value is only the first hurdle. Clearing it moves the burden to the employer, who then gets to explain the gap. If the explanation is accepted as a genuine material factor untainted by sex, the pay difference stands even though the work has been judged equal. What makes this ruling significant is how ordinary the accepted explanation is. Recruitment and retention pressure is not an exotic defence. Almost every employer with a warehouse, a night shift, a hard to fill technical function or a location premium can describe a version of it. [Acas guidance on equal pay](https://www.acas.org.uk/equal-pay) sets out how these comparisons work in principle, and the [Equality Act 2010](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents) is the legislation underneath them, but the practical question in any real case is how much evidence an employer needs to turn a staffing difficulty into a lawful pay gap. The scale of the underlying problem is why these cases keep coming. [Office for National Statistics figures](https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/datasets/annualsurveyofhoursandearningsashegenderpaygaptables) put median hourly pay for full time employees at 6.9 percent lower for women than for men in April 2025, and the gap across all employees at 12.8 percent. The [House of Commons Library briefing on the gender pay gap](https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07068/) tracks how slowly that has moved. Separately, [gender pay gap reporting rules](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/gender-pay-gap-reporting-overview) require large employers to publish their own figures, which is how most workers first discover a gap exists at all. None of that reporting obliges an employer to close a gap, and this ruling is a reminder that publishing a number and having to justify it are different duties. For workers, that reframes what to argue about. Proving your role is as demanding as a better paid one is necessary but not sufficient. The harder and more useful question is whether the employer can produce actual evidence of a recruitment problem in the better paid group, or whether it is describing a historical pay structure after the fact. A gap that has existed since before anyone measured local labour market conditions is a weaker candidate for this defence than one introduced in response to genuine vacancy pressure. ## What Did the Shop Workers Actually Keep? More than the headline suggests. According to Leigh Day, the appeal judges upheld the 2024 findings on night time premiums, overtime premiums and paid rest breaks. Those elements of the original judgment survive, and Next has said it will seek permission to appeal them in turn. So the case is not over, and the claimant group has not lost everything. That distinction matters practically. Basic hourly rate is the largest single component of most retail pay, which is why the reversal removes the bulk of the 30 million pounds. Premiums and paid breaks are smaller per hour but they compound across years of service and across thousands of claimants, and they are often where the clearest unjustified differences sit because they are set by policy rather than by market benchmarking. It also means the precedent being set is narrower than a simple win or loss framing implies. An employer can point to the labour market to justify a difference in base rate, and still be found wrong on how it treats the same two groups on overtime, unsocial hours and rest. Anyone comparing their own pay against a better paid comparator group should therefore audit the whole package rather than the headline rate, because [the parts of an offer where a gap quietly hides](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/12000-pay-gap-men-women-where-it-hides-in-your-offer) are usually the supplementary ones. ## Which Other Retail Claims Turn on This Ruling? Several very large ones. The BBC reports that Tesco, Asda, Morrisons and Sainsbury's are all involved in similar long running equal pay claims and will be studying the findings closely. Those cases share the basic architecture of the Next claim, which is store staff who are predominantly women comparing themselves to distribution centre staff who are predominantly men. Outside the supermarkets, public sector claims continue on a different footing. Thousands of women at [Birmingham City Council](https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/) reached a settlement last year, and [Brighton and Hove City Council](https://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/) is facing more than a thousand equal pay cases, both of which involve job evaluation schemes rather than a retail warehouse comparison. A local authority cannot easily argue that a competitive warehouse labour market forced its hand, so the material factor defence that worked here does not travel neatly into those disputes. The broader UK backdrop is a pay gap that closes slowly and unevenly. [Projections showing the gender pay gap taking another three decades to close](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/gender-pay-gap-30-years-2026) describe the trend line this ruling now sits on. Meanwhile transparency rules are moving in the opposite direction to this judgment, with [the UK moving to put salary ranges into job adverts](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/uk-salary-ranges-job-ads-transparency-2026) and [a new Fair Work Agency taking on enforcement](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/uk-fair-work-agency-launches-2026-worker-rights). More visibility of pay does not automatically mean more equal pay, and this case is the clearest recent illustration of the difference. ## Does This Mean Equal Pay Claims Are Dead? No, and treating it that way would be the wrong read. The claimants won the equal value argument, which is the expensive and technical part of any equal pay case, and they kept three separate findings on premiums and breaks. What they lost is a defence contest on one component, and that loss is under appeal. The practical effect is a raised evidential bar rather than a closed door. Employers now have a recent appellate authority to point at when they explain a gap by reference to recruitment difficulty. Claimants and unions will respond by attacking the evidence rather than the principle, asking for vacancy data, time to hire figures, offer acceptance rates and pay benchmarking from the period when the differential was set. That is a harder case to run and a more document heavy one, but it is not a hopeless one. It is worth being clear eyed about timelines too. This dispute began years ago, reached a tribunal judgment in 2024, has now been through appeal in 2026, and is heading back up again. [The 2024 ruling that the store workers won](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/next-employees-win-equal-pay-case-legal-battle) took six years to reach. Anyone considering a claim should plan for a multi year process and should not treat litigation as their primary route to a pay correction. ## What Should You Do If You Are on the Lower Paid Side of a Pay Gap? Start with evidence rather than argument. Establish what the comparator group is actually paid, what the difference is in base rate and in every premium, and how long the gap has existed. [Pay transparency laws determine what you are allowed to ask and disclose](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/pay-transparency-laws-and-what-you-can-ask), and in the UK discussing pay with colleagues for the purpose of finding out whether there is discrimination is protected. Guidance from the [Equality and Human Rights Commission](https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/) explains how the protected characteristics work in a pay context, and [the employment tribunal service](https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunals) sets out the time limits, which are short and catch people out. In most equal pay claims the clock runs from the end of employment rather than from the day you discover the gap, so establishing the facts early matters even if you never file. Then test the employer's explanation before you accept it. If you are told the other group is paid more because they are hard to recruit, ask how many vacancies that group has open, how long they stay open and what the turnover rate is. If those numbers are unremarkable, the market explanation is weak. Knowing [how to spot an underpaid role and a lowball offer](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/spot-underpaid-roles-and-lowball-offers) is the same skill applied to your current employer instead of a new one. Use the individual routes in parallel with any collective one. A claim takes years, while a raise conversation takes a quarter. [The evidence based approach to asking for a raise](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/how-to-ask-for-a-raise) and [negotiation tactics that hold up under pressure](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/salary-negotiation-tactics-that-work-2026) will move your pay faster than any tribunal will. Research on [the penalty women face for negotiating](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/negotiation-penalty-why-women-pay-more-for-asking) is worth reading first, because the framing that works is often different from the one recommended generally. ## How Do You Tell a Market Rate From an Excuse? Look for whether the employer behaved like the market was tight. A genuine recruitment problem leaves a trail, including sign on bonuses, agency spend, referral schemes, relaxed entry requirements, shift premiums, retention payments and adverts that run repeatedly. A pay gap justified by a market that shows none of those signs is an assertion rather than a defence. Second, check whether the premium moved when conditions changed. Warehouse labour markets have been genuinely volatile, and [a single warehouse closure putting hundreds of jobs at risk](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/gousto-clay-lake-warehouse-closure-290-jobs-what-workers-should-do) shows how fast that demand can reverse. If the higher rate was introduced during a shortage and stayed flat while the shortage eased, it is functioning as a structural gap rather than a market response, and that is a much weaker position for an employer to defend. Third, compare the treatment, not only the number. If two groups are said to be paid differently purely because of external market pressure, there is no obvious reason for them to be treated differently on overtime rates, unsocial hours or paid breaks. That is precisely where the store workers succeeded in this case. [Enforcement bodies naming employers that underpaid staff](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/uk-minimum-wage-naming-list-underpaid-workers) publish useful patterns of what non compliance looks like in practice, and the same tells apply when you are assessing a gap inside your own organisation. ## Related Articles - [Pay Transparency Laws and What You Can Ask](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/pay-transparency-laws-and-what-you-can-ask) - [The Negotiation Penalty and Why Women Pay More for Asking](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/negotiation-penalty-why-women-pay-more-for-asking) - [How to Spot Underpaid Roles and Lowball Offers](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/spot-underpaid-roles-and-lowball-offers) - [How to Ask for a Raise](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/how-to-ask-for-a-raise) - [How to Negotiate a Job Offer After You Have It in Writing](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/how-to-negotiate-a-job-offer) - [Australian Union Pushes for Equal Pay at BHP Coal Mines in Queensland](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/australian-union-equal-pay-applications-bhp) - [The UK Just Published the Names of Employers That Underpaid Their Staff](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/uk-minimum-wage-naming-list-underpaid-workers) - [Service Jobs Explained, From Retail to Hospitality to Field Service](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/service-jobs-explained-retail-hospitality-field-service) - [Salary Transparency Now Essential in Job Listings](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/americans-demand-salary-transparency) - [The Push for Salary Transparency in Ontario's Job Market](https://www.metaintro.com/blog/ontario-salary-transparency) ## People Also Asked ### Q: Did Next win or lose the equal pay case? A: It won the central point and lost others. The [Employment Appeal Tribunal](https://www.gov.uk/courts-tribunals/employment-appeal-tribunal) overturned the 2024 finding on basic hourly pay, accepting that recruitment and retention pressure justified paying warehouse staff more than shop floor staff for work of equal value. Findings on night time premiums, overtime premiums and paid rest breaks were upheld, and both sides are pursuing further appeals. ### Q: Can an employer legally pay two groups differently for equal work? A: Yes, if it can show the difference is genuinely caused by something other than sex. That is the material factor defence under the [Equality Act 2010](https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents). Labour market pressure in one group and not the other is one accepted reason, and [Acas](https://www.acas.org.uk/equal-pay) sets out how equal pay comparisons are assessed. The employer has to evidence the factor rather than simply assert it. ### Q: Does this ruling affect the supermarket equal pay claims? A: It is likely to be influential rather than binding on the facts. Tesco, Asda, Morrisons and Sainsbury's are all defending long running claims built on the same store versus distribution centre comparison, so a recent appellate decision accepting a market forces justification strengthens their position on base pay. Each case still turns on its own evidence about recruitment conditions. Looking for your next opportunity? A pay gap you cannot get corrected internally is one of the most common reasons people move, and the fastest correction is usually a new offer rather than a long argument. [Metaintro](https://www.metaintro.com) matches retail, warehouse and operations professionals to roles with published pay ranges, so you can compare what your work is actually worth in the wider market. [Create a free profile](https://www.metaintro.com/signup) and benchmark yourself before your next review. ### Share this article [https://x.com/intent/tweet?text=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff](https://x.com/intent/tweet?text=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff)[http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff](http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff)[https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff&title=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff&title=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next)[mailto:?subject=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&body=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff](mailto:?subject=Shop%20Floor%20Staff%20Lose%20Their%20Equal%20Pay%20Payout%20as%20the%20Appeal%20Tribunal%20Sides%20With%20Next&body=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.metaintro.com%2Fblog%2Fnext-equal-pay-appeal-overturned-shop-floor-staff) For job seekers ## Your next role is already posted. Say what you want next. We search every day and send real, open roles, with help getting ready for each. [Get Started Free](/signup)[Search matching jobs](/jobs/search) - MatchCompare live roles against your current evidence. - PositionTurn proof projects into role-specific applications. - ImproveUse market feedback to keep the skill plan current. [Return to navigation](#main-navigation)