Layer 1

Judge throws out Boots employees' premium pay claim

People A judge has thrown out claims that Boots discriminated against 140 pharmacists by reducing their premium pay, ruling that the employees were too late in filing their cases.

A judge has thrown out claims that Boots discriminated against 140 pharmacists by reducing their premium pay, ruling that the employees were too late in filing their cases.  


The pharmacists should have brought their claim for discrimination earlier and were "out of time", employment tribunal judge Peter Britton ruled at a hearing last month (April 25-26).


The employees filed their claim at an employment tribunal in May 2012 after 19 colleagues successfully challenged the health and beauty giant for acting unlawfully when it cut Sunday pay rates by a quarter in June 2011.  


The 140 claimants are still awaiting a judgement on claims for unlawful deductions of wages

More on the Boots premium pay dispute

PDA determined to 'take on' Boots at second premium       pay tribunal

Boots employees face ‘some risk' in refusing premium       pay cuts

Boots employees win battle over Sunday rate cuts

MORE NEWS

The 19 pharmacists who lodged a claim in December 2011 received arrears of their Sunday pay at double time from the date of the first deduction. They had also claimed discrimination because of unfair treatment on the grounds of age and sex.


In the current case, the judge accepted Boots' argument that the pharmacists should have brought their claims earlier, the PDA Union said last week (May 3).


"We argued that the unlawful deductions continued from June 1, 2011 and that every month there was a continuing deduction and, therefore, a continuing act and detriment," it said.


Boots argued there was just one deduction that took place in June 2011.


The 140 claimants are still awaiting a judgement on claims for unlawful deductions of wages as the same judge ruled the discrimination and wage issues should be heard separately. 


A Boots spokeswoman said: "We are working closely with our colleagues to shape together the future of pharmacy for the benefit of our patients and our business and our commitment to all Boots colleagues including pharmacists, remain the same – we want colleagues to feel properly rewarded and recognised for the great care they provide every day."   


What do you make of the judge's ruling?

Comment below or email us at [email protected] You can also find C+D on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook

3 Comments

Rajive Patel, Community pharmacist

" we want colleagues to feel properly rewarded and recognised for the great care they provide every day."

- I love rhetoric.

Gerry Diamond, Primary care pharmacist

Well I wouldn't take it for granted that any employer would take it lying down and that seems to be how the cookie crumbles on pay issues across the piste.

Also, the whole debaclle seems to have 'timed-out'!

Leon The Apothecary, Student

I didn't realise unlawful had a time limit.

Job of the week

Pharmacist Manager
Midlands, Cheshire & Dorset
Salary dependent upon experience