Mum's pay win opens floodgates

THOUSANDS of mothers could be entitled to backdated maternity pay after a landmark legal ruling. The decision by the Appeal Court follows a nine-year battle by mother-of-two Michelle Alabaster to recover just £204.53. It could lead to a flood of claims from women who have had children in the last 29 years.

Mrs Alabaster was working as a secretary with the Woolwich Building Society in 1996 when she became pregnant.

Before taking maternity leave she was awarded a 12.9% pay rise, taking her salary to £12,801. But when she went on leave she discovered that her maternity payments did not include the rise.

Outraged, she decided to take her case to an employment tribunal under the Equal Pay Act of 1970. She claimed it was 'inherently unfair' that a woman receiving a pay rise after her maternity pay had been calculated should not then benefit from that rise.

The Woolwich was acting within the law at the time, but Alabaster, 36, was convinced the law was unfair. Ironically, the mother from Bexleyheath, South East London, launched her case using legal expenses cover from her insurance policy - with the Woolwich.

Speaking after the ruling, she said: 'This wasn't about the money, it was about the principle. They must have thought I was worth a pay rise, but the moment they realised I was pregnant they said we are not paying the rise any more.'

Unsuccessful at tribunal level, she took her legal battle through the British courts, ending up at the European Court of Justice. She argued that the Woolwich had broken European sex discrimination law by underpaying her. The Court of Appeal agreed that English law, as well as European law should have allowed the payment to be made.

'Now they have changed the law so that this can never happen again,' said Alabaster. 'They ought to call it Alabaster's law. Pregnancy is a really expensive time for new mums and it is hard making ends meet. I am proud that I have fought for what is right. Thousands of women will benefit from what I have done.'

She intends to spend the £204.53 plus £65.86 interest on her daughter Ellie, now nine, who wants to 'buy enough books to start a library'.

The Court of Appeal ruling could open the floodgates for scores of women to fight for backdated pay. It is thought some claims may already be in the pipeline, awaiting yesterday's ruling. In the 'worst case scenario' women may chase backdated payments to 1976 - because that is when the European Equal Pay Directive came into force.

Business leaders warned that the latest change in the law will add to their burden of red tape. Steven Hill, policy adviser for the British Chamber of Commerce, said: 'Employers already find the administration of statutory maternity pay a nightmare and this will just add to that complexity.'

A Federation of Small Businesses spokesman added: 'Hundreds of thousands of women go on maternity leave each year. What the Alabaster case does is draw a curtain of uncertainty over all those calculations.'