Who? Stefan Cross, 46-year-old civil liberties and employment lawyer, and principal of Stefan Cross Solicitors in Newcastle-upon-Tyne.


Why is he in the news? He is representing some 7,000 of the hundreds of thousands of female public sector workers who are eligible and suing for equal pay settlements stretching back over six years.



Prior to a 2003 EU ruling on equal pay, employers were obliged to pay women just two years' back pay to compensate for being paid less than men. The EU ruling extended that period to six years, but town halls and others have failed to refund the money on the grounds of cost. They are now saying that they can only afford to meet the women's claims for back pay, estimated to be £3 billion, if men's salaries are cut by up to £15,000.



Trade unions have accused no-win, no-fee solicitors - such as Mr Cross - of undermining industrial relations in the public sector by pushing for settlement, rather than allowing union lawyers to renegotiate terms.



Background: A law degree at Southampton University followed by a masters degree in employment law at the Leicester University. He went on to pass his Law Society finals at the College of Law in Guildford in 1983 and took articles at Bournemouth firm GA Mooring Aldridge & Brownlee. He then joined Thompsons in Newcastle, rising to partner and head of employment before leaving in 2002 to establish his own firm.



Route to the case: 'I actively sought the work by employing former trade union officials with contacts within the local authorities. They explained the women's rights to them and, along with advertisements and word of mouth, we took it from there.'



Thoughts on the case: 'Everyone agrees that equal pay is great in theory, but when women try to enforce it, they and their lawyers are treated as pariahs threatening jobs and services. We've had people picketing our meetings and members of my staff have been intimidated. There was even an adjournment debate in Parliament, when we were criticised. But the fact remains, neither the trade unions nor the employers have done what the law told them to do three years ago and so we have kick-started the process. Why should the public sector be allowed to ignore the law? And why should women be expected to subsidise the public sector by working for a lower wage than their male counterparts?'



Dealing with the media: 'The media has done a wonderful job informing and educating women about their rights. Conversely, and I accept that alarmist headlines and shock-horror stories sell papers, the press has attacked these women's legitimate struggle to achieve equal pay - something that has been enshrined in law for over 35 years - because of the possible consequences to men's pay. The women are not to blame. It's the employers, who were breaking the law, who must shoulder responsibility.'



Jonathan Rayner