Rubbish Check
Guardian Business · 7 September 2026
source“Next overturns equal pay ruling that raised basic wages for shop staff”
R4/ 10
Selective
Rubbish Rating — 1 = base fact, 10 = pure rubbish
12345678910
In short
Rubbish Talk rates the Guardian's headline that Next "overturns equal pay ruling that raised basic wages" a 4/10 because the appeal win is narrow and real on basic pay specifically, but the headline's generic "equal pay ruling" phrasing obscures that Next lost on night pay, overtime, and rest breaks in the same judgment, which even Next's own opposing law firm called a "mixed ruling."
The Verdict
Selective. The headline's core claim, that Next won its appeal on basic pay, is accurate and matches the primary judgment. But by saying Next "overturns equal pay ruling" without qualifying the scope, it risks reading as a full reversal, when the same appeal tribunal upheld the tribunal's findings against Next on night-time pay, overtime pay, and paid rest breaks, and left the Sunday premium question unresolved.
What actually happened
Next won its appeal against a 2024 employment tribunal ruling on one specific element: whether it must pay shop staff the same basic hourly rate as warehouse staff. The employment appeal tribunal accepted Next's argument that market-rate pressures justified paying warehouse workers more, reversing that part of the original ruling. However, the same appeal judgment rejected Next's challenges on several other pay elements, and Leigh Day, the law firm representing the roughly 6,400 claimants, described the outcome as a "mixed ruling."
Key facts
- The 2024 tribunal ruling covered more than 3,540 claimants; total claimants across the litigation now exceed 6,400.
- The case period ran 2012 to 2023; women made up almost 78% of retail sales jobs and men about 53% of warehouse staff.
- Some warehouse staff earned between 38p and £3.13 more per hour than retail sales staff during that period, per Leigh Day.
- Next won on basic pay, but the EAT upheld the tribunal's findings against Next on night-time premiums, overtime premiums, and paid rest breaks.
- The Sunday premium pay issue was not resolved; the EAT sent it back to the employment tribunal.
- The original and appeal tribunals both found no direct discrimination; the employment tribunal found pay setting was "all about cost," not gender.
- Leigh Day says it intends to appeal the basic-pay element further, so the matter is not final.
What to watch for
Watch for whether Next appeals or accepts the remaining unresolved Sunday premium question, and whether Leigh Day's planned further appeal on basic pay proceeds. Future coverage framing this as a closed "Next wins" story would ignore that three of the five contested pay elements went against the retailer.
About this scoreThe R-Score is Rubbish Talk's editorial opinion on how far a headline's framing sits from what the underlying facts support. It is a judgement about presentation and emphasis, not an allegation that any outlet has acted dishonestly. Every figure we rely on is linked under Receipts so you can check it yourself.
