Exactly Virtue.
I have been following this case. It comes down to the basic feminist principle that a woman has equal worth to a man, and therefor her pay must be the same as a mans - IRRESPECTIVE OF THE WORK SHE DOES.
In this case the women were indeed canteen hands, child care workers and the like. Their jobs were best described as comfortable jobs - working inside, mostly 8am to 4pm, no heavy lifting, comparatively less noise, smell or danger involved. The men whose wages they compared themselves to were uncomfortable jobs - outside in the weather, heavy lifting, elevated risk of injury, early start and much shorter earning lifespan.
The Judges decided that from this day forward people would be paid according to who they are and not what they do.
I see this as a two-card trick. Feminists can degrade the work unskilled men do comfortable in the knowledge that men will still do these jobs. Why? Because feminists have destroyed our boy's education so comprehensively that boys will have no other career option but to take these dirty, dangerous, unskilled, underpaid jobs.
I would note that this caper got started with Wimbledon quite some years back. It was decided after lobbying from feminists that women were to be paid equal pay with the men. This is despite only working 3 sets instead of the 5 the men worked. The women also get the early evening match and men the late evening match, and also the men get the early morning matches, the ladies start later. So women start later, finish earlier, do less work and get paid the same money.
Of course I support equal pay for women, but equal pay for equal work.
And as for sandwich hands getting the same as garbage workers - once we fix education so our boys can read and write again lets see who they get to empty the bins - my prediction - prisoner work gangs composed of men in default of child support because their jobs don't pay what they used to.
