Business · Companies · 13 hrs ago
UK Supreme Court blocks Tesco appeal in 16,000-worker equal pay case
The UK Supreme Court refused Tesco permission to appeal a ruling in an equal pay case involving more than 16,000 current and former shop workers.
The workers argue that Tesco pays its mostly female store staff less than mostly male distribution workers for work of equal value.
The case began in 2018 and is part of wider legal claims involving workers at several UK supermarkets.
The dispute over this appeal was about how a tribunal should establish what different jobs involve.
The tribunal can use Tesco’s training and operational materials to assess the work, rather than relying only on individual daily duties.
Tesco says the roles require different skills and demands, denies that pay differences are related to gender, and continues to defend the claims.
The equal pay case will now proceed under the tribunal’s existing approach, with workers’ claims still to be decided.
The Supreme Court refused Tesco permission to appeal a ruling in an equal pay case involving more than 16,000 shop workers.
The refusal leaves the existing judgment intact and ends Tesco’s challenge to how tribunals establish what jobs involve.
The case can proceed under the tribunal’s established approach, which allows it to use Tesco’s training and operational materials.
The workers’ claims concern pay differences between predominantly female store staff and mostly male distribution centre workers.
Tesco says the roles require different skills and demands and strongly defends the claims.
- Who
- Tesco and more than 16,000 current and former shop workers represented by Leigh Day.
- What
- The Supreme Court refused Tesco permission to appeal a ruling on how tribunals assess the work employees do.
- When
- The Court of Appeal ruling was handed down in May. The Supreme Court refused permission earlier in October 2026.
- Where
- United Kingdom.
- Why
- The appeal concerned whether tribunals could use Tesco’s training and operational materials to establish the factual content of jobs in an equal value assessment.
Tesco
Shop workers represented by Leigh Day
Pay differences
Tesco
Tesco says store and distribution centre roles require different skills and demands, and that the differences have nothing to do with gender.
Shop workers represented by Leigh Day
The workers allege that predominantly female store staff are underpaid compared with mostly male distribution centre workers.
Tribunal method
Tesco
Tesco challenged the use of its training materials and operational manuals to establish what work employees do.
Shop workers represented by Leigh Day
The workers’ representatives say tribunals can rely on an employer’s own materials to assess job requirements.
Justification
Tesco
Tesco says it strongly defends the claims.
Shop workers represented by Leigh Day
Leigh Day argues Tesco cannot lawfully rely on market rates to justify the pay gap.
The equal pay case against Tesco was launched by claimant-focused law firms Harcus Parker and Leigh Day.
The Court of Appeal rejected Tesco’s challenge to how the tribunal established job facts for customer assistants and warehouse operatives.
The Supreme Court refused Tesco permission to appeal.
News outlets reported that the refusal left the existing judgment intact and brought Tesco’s challenge to an end.
- Workers represented
- More than 16,000 current and former Tesco shop workers
- Supreme Court decision
- Refused Tesco permission to appeal
- Court of Appeal ruling
- Handed down in May 2026
- Case launched
- 2018
- Claimant law firms
- Harcus Parker and Leigh Day
3 sources
What people are saying
This is a significant outcome for the 16,000 Tesco workers we represent and brings Tesco’s challenge on this issue to an end.
The courts have confirmed tribunals can rely on an employer’s own training and operational materials when determining what employees are required to do.
The jobs in our stores and distribution centres are different. These roles require different skills and demands which lead to variations in pay, but this has absolutely nothing to do with gender.