Next shop workers have won an equal pay case after fighting for it for six years. A tribunal ruled against the retailer, that has kept its sales staff-the majority of them women-on lower pay compared to the men in its warehouses. This victory could force Next to pay over £30 million in compensation.

Next shop workers employed at a famous UK retail chain have finally won a six-year battle for equal pay and now are expected to receive over £30million in compensation for 3,540 of their number. A legal victory opens the way for other similar cases against big UK supermarkets, potentially benefiting thousands of workers.

At the heart of the matter lay the reality that Next was paying its majority women shop-floor retail sales staff less than its mostly male warehouse workers. In current terms, it meant a legal battle over pay differences discovered in 2012 and finally settled in a clearly victorious place for the shop workers. The employment tribunal found the pay difference was unjustified, even though Next had tried to argue that it was because of “market rates” for each of the job roles in question.

Next has a total of 466 stores within the UK, and accordingly, the company explained further that the pay gap was the result of a requirement to attract and also keep the people in the warehouse and to work at unsocial hours being night, Sunday, and public holiday. The company said that justifies the premium paid to warehouse staff. They also said that the pay gap was the result of some level of pay required to the retail staff at the gross margin that was acceptable enough to keep the business continuing.

Such arguments of Next did not find full favor with the tribunal. While agreeing that financial imperatives might be the mainspring of Next’s actions, the tribunal held that market factors alone could not provide justification for the lower pay of sales staff. In this respect, the tribunal warned that financial reasons can never be made an alibi for unequal pay because such a posture would birth anomalies in the concept of equal pay in the equal pay legislation.

The ruling clearly disallowed the idea that market rates could be used by businesses to justify pay differentials in cases where there was likely discrimination based on this. The tribunal noted the fact that setting pay according to market forces working would further reinforce discriminative norms, particularly in industrial sectors where one or the other gender tends to dominate a role.

Next intends to appeal against the tribunal’s decision, but on the ground that the ruling raises vital legal questions. The company said, “In respect of the specific terms in which the claim succeeded, it is our intention to appeal. This is the first equal pay group action in the private sector to reach a decision at tribunal level and raises a number of important points of legal principle.”

However, it was a significant win for the retail workers, and it trickled into other areas regarding how their pay would be determined. The after-effect is such that the sales employees at Next will receive the backpay to equate unequal pay for as long as six years. Not only that, their per hour remunerations are also going to increase so that these are on par with warehouse workers on the current contract. This includes pay for working on Sundays, night shifts, and overtime, just like paid rest breaks, already provided to warehouse staff.

The ruling was saluted by the firm representing the workers, Leigh Day. Elizabeth George, a partner and barrister with Leigh Day, described it as “hugely significant” in that it was “exactly the type of pay discrimination which equal pay laws were intended to Stamp out.” She further said, “We expect many other women to come forward, especially since this successful judgment.”.

The decision of the tribunal also pointed out that although retail employees enjoyed some facilities that were not available to warehouse employees, this could not, therefore, be taken as a reason for paying them less. The ruling criticized the manner in which Next compared the working conditions for sales staff with those of warehouse staff, indicating how this comparison was somewhat exaggerated.

It’s the first successful equal pay claim of its kind against a national UK retailer and should set the precedent for thousands of other cases across the UK. According to Leigh Day, major UK supermarkets will be watching the judgment very carefully because over 112,000 store staff from chains such as Asda, Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons, and Co-op have brought similar claims. Next judgment is seen by lawyers at Leigh Day as setting the precedent for how these cases dealt with.

But most importantly, this win for Next shop workers is more than a victory-it could be a game-changer for retail workers throughout the United Kingdom. This sends out the strongest possible message that equal pay is a right, not a privilege, and companies cannot use market rates as an excuse to carry out unfair pay practices. This decision-also, the appeals process that is unfolding-is most certainly under the careful eye of many anxious to see if this landmark ruling holds strong, promising to set a new horizon in equal pay across the UK retail sector.