Europe's highest court has ruled women can be paid less than men on the basis of length of service in a firm - even if they have to take time off to bring up children, writes Jamie Smyth, European Correspondent.
The landmark judgment marks a setback for equal-pay campaigners and was criticised by Irish MEPs yesterday for not taking into account women's dual role in the workplace and the home.
The European Court of Justice found that length of service is a legitimate criterion to award higher pay rates to certain workers.
It also ruled that employers do not have to justify on a case-by-case basis their pay structures based on the length of service.
In the specific case, the court rejected a claim by British health inspector Bernadette Cadman, who said her employer unjustifiably paid her male colleagues on the same grade more only because they had worked more years.
Ms Cadman argued length of service often depended on domestic circumstances such as pregnancy and employers must provide special justification for paying men more than women when they hold the same post.
She took the case in 2001 when she discovered that four male colleagues were paid between €6,000 and €13,350 more than her on the basis that they had longer service with the British Health and Safety Executive.
The court rejected her argument, finding that experience acquired by a worker that enabled them to perform duties better was a legitimate objective of a pay policy.
The ruling was criticised by several MEPS. Fine Gael MEP Mairead McGuinness said the ruling did not take account of the significant role women were playing in the workplace and at home in the family.