Equal pay claim could cost Bradford Council millions, says union
Lou Foster-Wilson, GMB Organiser, called the situation "shameful" and said that members were angry at being "short-changed". She also said hundreds of claims were "piling up...with hundreds more to follow". "The longer it takes to settle these claims the bigger the bill Bradford Council will have to pick up," Ms Foster-Wilson added. The dispute relates to claims staff in female-dominated roles, such as teaching assistants, have historically been underpaid in relation to those in male-dominated positions.
'Right thing'
According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, a council spokesperson said: "People are at the heart of what we do in Bradford, and our commitment to equality and inclusion is a big part of that. "We have well established procedures for discussing many matters with the trade unions and we continue in discussion with them to understand any issues their members may have."Ms Foster-Wilson added: "I urge the council to do the right thing by our members and its workforce and get round the negotiating table, so we can sort out a settlement for our members as soon as possible."In 2024 Birmingham City Council agreed to pay 6,000 of its workers a settlement after an unequal pay row. It was said to be one of the key factors in the authority declaring effective bankruptcy the year before when it said it was facing a bill of £760m to settle the claims.
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
Ex-minister says no ‘fierce opposition' to Afghan route amid data breach fallout
Conservative ex-ministers offered no 'fierce opposition' to plans to bring Afghan refugees to the UK via a secret route following a data breach, the former armed forces minister has said. James Heappey, who was armed forces minister at the time the data breach came to light, said claims he had backed a 'new entitlement' for people affected by the breach but not eligible for other schemes were 'untrue'. His comments on social media on Thursday appeared to contradict those of former immigration minister Robert Jenrick, who said he and former home secretary Suella Braverman had 'strongly opposed' plans for the Afghan Response Route in 'internal meetings'. But Mr Heappey, himself a former Army officer who served in Afghanistan, said the cross-government committee responsible for the policy 'tried to extend entitlements by the smallest number possible'. He said: 'This was led by legal advice & I don't recall fierce opposition. There was frustrated resignation that it was necessary.' Mr Heappey did, however, recall 'rancorous' meetings in which departments 'fought fiercely for their priorities and/or to avoid unresourced responsibility'. He also denied that a new 'secret route' was not under consideration at the time he resigned as armed forces minister in March 2024. The data breach, which saw a defence official release the details of nearly 19,000 people seeking to flee Kabul in 2022, became public on Tuesday after an unprecedented superinjunction banning reporting of the breach was lifted. Since then, Conservative former ministers have sought to distance themselves from the handling of the breach and the subsequent creation of a secret relocation scheme, the Afghanistan Response Route, in April 2024. Along with Mr Jenrick's claims of having opposed the route prior to his resignation in December 2023, Ms Braverman herself has said there is 'much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD (Ministry of Defence), both ministers and officials'. Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' regarding the previous government's actions in relation to Kabul, and has described the handling of the breach as 'farcical'. Sir Ben Wallace, who applied for the initial injunction as defence secretary, has said he makes 'no apology' for doing so, saying it was motivated by the need to protect people in Afghanistan whose safety was at risk. Mr Heappey backed up his former boss, saying the superinjunction was 'needed' to protect people from 'mortal danger'. He said: 'The intelligence assessment was clear: if the Taliban got their hands on the list, violent and even lethal reprisal was likely.' Mr Heappey added that, although a review by retired civil servant Paul Rimmer found there was now little threat to those on the list as a result of the breach, this did not mean the threat had never existed. He also sought to defend the individual responsible for the leak, saying they had been 'incredibly dedicated to those we served with in Afghanistan'. Grant Shapps, who was defence secretary by the time the superinjunction was granted, has not yet publicly commented on the revelations. The data breach saw a dataset of 18,714 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme released in February 2022 by a defence official who emailed a file outside authorised government systems. Defence sources have said that details of MI6 spies, SAS and special forces personnel were included in the spreadsheet, after they had endorsed Afghans who had applied to be brought to the UK. The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the blunder when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a super-injunction was granted at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak. The leak also led to the creation of the secret Afghanistan Response Route, which is understood to have cost about £400 million so far, with a projected final cost of about £850 million. A total of about 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. The official responsible for the email error was moved to a new role but not sacked. The superinjunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has apologised on behalf of the Conservatives for the leak, telling LBC: 'On behalf of the government and on behalf of the British people, yes, because somebody made a terrible mistake and names were put out there… and we are sorry for that.' Meanwhile, Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee has demanded to see intelligence assessments relating to the data breach 'immediately' as MPs and peers begin inquiries over the incident. The Commons Defence Committee has also indicated it will call former ministers to give evidence on the breach, and Mr Heappey said he would be 'happy to contribute' to the committee's inquiry.
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
More than 100 Britons' details in leaked Afghan dataset, including spies and SAS
The details of more than 100 Britons, including spies and special forces, were included in a massive data leak that resulted in thousands of Afghans being secretly relocated to the UK. Defence sources have said that details of MI6 spies, SAS and special forces personnel were included in the spreadsheet, after they had endorsed Afghans who had applied to be brought to the UK. The dataset, containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) became aware of the breach more than a year later, when excerpts of the spreadsheet were anonymously posted in a Facebook group in August 2023. Other details leaked included the names and contact details of the Arap applicants and names of their family members. In a statement on Tuesday, after an unprecedented superinjunction was lifted by a High Court judge, Defence Secretary John Healey offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the British Government for the data breach. He later told the Commons the spreadsheet contained 'names and contact details of applicants and, in some instances, information relating to applicants' family members, and in a small number of cases the names of members of Parliament, senior military officers and Government officials were noted as supporting the application'. 'This was a serious departmental error,' he added. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge also apologised on behalf of the former Conservative government, which was in power when the leak happened and when it was discovered more than a year later. Mr Cartlidge later asked Mr Healey about reports that someone other than the original person who leaked the data had been engaged in blackmail. Arap was responsible for relocating Afghan nationals who had worked for or with the UK Government and were therefore at risk of reprisals once the Taliban returned to power in Kabul in 2021. Between 80,000 and 100,000 people, including the estimated number of family members of the Arap applicants, were affected by the breach and could be at risk of harassment, torture or death if the Taliban obtained their data, judges said in June 2024. However, an independent review, commissioned by the Government in January 2025, concluded last month that the dataset is 'unlikely to significantly shift Taliban understanding of individuals who may be of interest to them'. The breach resulted in the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – by the previous government in April 2024. The scheme is understood to have cost around £400 million so far, with a projected cost once completed of around £850 million. Millions more are expected to be paid in legal costs and compensation. Around 4,500 people, made up of 900 Arap applicants and approximately 3,600 family members, have been brought to the UK or are in transit so far through the Afghanistan Response Route. A further estimated 600 people and their relatives are expected to be relocated before the scheme closes, with a total of around 6,900 people expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. Projected costs of the scheme may include relocation costs, transitional accommodation, legal costs and local authority tariffs. The case returned to the High Court in London on Thursday, sitting in a closed session in the morning where journalists and their lawyers were excluded. While private hearings exclude the public and press but allow the parties in the case to remain, closed hearings require specific lawyers who can deal with sensitive issues, including national security. During the public part of the hearing, Mr Justice Chamberlain said that while he needed to give lawyers for the Ministry of Defence an 'opportunity' to argue why a closed hearing was needed, 'I will be scrutinising very carefully any justification for holding any part of this hearing in private, let alone in closed'. The judge later said he would not be 'kicking the ball down the road'. He added: 'The superinjunction has now been lifted and if there are other matters that are capable of being reported in public, that needs to be able to happen straight away.' Also on Thursday, Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) requested a number of documents used in the superinjunction proceedings be provided to it 'immediately'. This includes intelligence assessments from the MoD and the Joint Intelligence Organisation, as well as the unredacted report of retired civil servant Paul Rimmer. ISC chairman Lord Beamish continued that the committee had also asked for the reasons why barristers for the Government previously told the Court of Appeal that information about the breach could not be shared with the ISC.
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
Lloyds to make extra £4bn available to help more first-time buyers
Lloyds Banking Group will make an extra £4 billion available to first-time buyers borrowing at high loans-to-incomes, following recent mortgage lending reforms. The banking group is expanding its first-time buyer boost scheme, which is available through Lloyds Bank and Halifax. Since launching the initiative in August 2024, 11,000 first-time buyers have already been helped to get on the ladder by borrowing more than 4.5 times their income, the bank said. To qualify for the first-time buyer boost, and subject to affordability, customers must have a total employed household income of £50,000 and a deposit of at least 10%, among other criteria. Based on typical borrowing trends, around an extra 13,500 more first-time buyers could potentially be helped by Lloyds' extra cash injection. Many banks have recently updated their affordability assessments, following clarification from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Lloyds said that in the the two months since updating its affordability assessments, it has helped more than 1,000 first-time buyers access a mortgage that they would not have qualified for before. Andrew Asaam, homes director at Lloyds Banking Group, said: 'Recent affordability changes have already started to help would-be homeowners get on the property ladder sooner and lending an extra £4 billion means we can help even more customers get the keys to their first home.' More mortgages in general are set to be available at more than 4.5 times a buyer's income following recent Bank of England recommendations that some lenders can offer more high loan-to-income mortgages if they choose to. Britain's biggest building society – Nationwide – announced last week that it is aiming to increase its high loan-to-income lending limit. Eligible first-time buyers can now apply for Nationwide's Helping Hand mortgage with a £30,000 salary, down from £35,000, and joint applicants with a £50,000 combined salary – down from £55,000. The Government has been looking to cut red tape around financial services as part of its drive for economic growth. Meanwhile, Barclays announced cuts on rates across 32 mortgage products on Thursday, coming into effect from Friday. They include a two-year fixed rate for borrowers with a 40% deposit at 3.76%, down from 3.89% previously. The loan has an £899 product fee. A two-year fix with no product fee will see its rate cut from 4.09% to 4.03%. The deal is available to borrowers with a 40% deposit. For people with a 25% deposit, Barclays is offering a two-year fix from Friday at 3.93% with an £899 product fee and a two-year fix at 4.15% with no product fee.
