If a woman decides on equal pay clam, she must do so considering a comparator in mind, The comparator must be categorized in ‘like work’ category which means that the comparator and the claimant might not share the identical work but they both share the similar nature of work. If the claimant can prove the ‘like work’ title to her request, the tribunal takes the case forward. Under this category, the administration is asked by the tribunal to justify the difference in pay of the woman and her comparator. If the difference can be proven under practical importance or if the factor of genuine material can be justified, the tribunal will support the comparator here.
Talking in particular about the difference in practical approach/importance can be explained under the level of responsibilities that a comparator persists as compared to the claimant. If the job responsibility by the comparator is handled properly by the comparator bring a significant value of change in the firm, the claimant will be declined for her equal pay claim. One of the most common illustrations can be justified by a night shift job where a comparator is happily associated with his responsibilities on night shift work which is hardly impossible for the claimant. On this basis, the claimant will not be supported on her claim.