Summary This Court of Appeal (CoA) decision involved worker status and whether or not a commitment to offer or accept a minimum amount of work was crucial to worker status for the purposes of claiming holiday pay. Law Working Time Regulations 1998 Regulation 2(1) of the Regulations defines a worker in the following way: ""Worker" means an individual who has entered into or works under (or, where the employment has ceased, worked under) –              (a) a contract of employment; or…

  Summary In another status case, the Employment Appeal Tribunal was called upon to weigh the balance of the requirement to provide personal service against the degree of control held by the claimant, and decide which side of the self-employed / worker status debate this particular claimant fell. Law Section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act (ERA) 1996 defines a worker as follows: (3) In this Act “worker” (except in the phrases “shop worker” and “betting worker”) means an individual who…

Summary It is not possible to offset a failure to provide agency workers comparable rights to an end users directly employed workers, by offering an enhanced rate of pay to the agency workers. Rights should be determined and matched on a term by term basis. This however does not extend to the right to apply for a directly employed vacancy with the hirer, nor does it include the requirement to provide the same number of working hours as directly employed workers.  Law The Agency Worker…

Summary The Employment Appeal Tribunal had to consider the status of owner driver franchisees in this case on employment status and consider once again the written agreement between the parties, the extent that represented the true relationship between the parties and the right of substitution found within it. Law Autoclenz v Belcher The Supreme Court ruled that the individuals in this case were employees, on the basis that substitution clauses in their contracts were actually a sham and…

  Summary The Court of Appeal has upheld earlier decisions of the ET and EAT in another gig economy case, confirming that the ability to offer a piece of work to a substitute does not mean that the service is not provided personally, and therefore does not mean they cannot be found to be a worker. Law Section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 defines a worker as someone who has “entered into or works under a: contract of employment or any other contract, whether express or…

  Summary An employment tribunal (ET) has decided that, for the period that the claimant was on furlough, he was not a worker for the purposes of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and therefore did not accrue annual leave during that time. Law Workers are separate from employees. Workers agree under a contract – which can be oral or written, expressed or implied – to personally perform services for another party, who is not a client or customer of any profession or business carried on by…

The Court of Appeal has ruled that a union comprising of foster carers should be eligible to be included in the official list of recognised unions as those operating under a Foster Care Agreement could be considered workers. Under section 3 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA), trade unions are entitled to apply to the Certification Officer (CO) in order to be entered onto the list of registered unions, which gives the union access to increased rights such…

Summary The Court of Appeal has refused to hear an appeal against a decision which found that private-hire drivers were ‘workers’ and not ‘independent contractors’. The term 'employment status' is the arrangement under which an individual is engaged to work for an organisation. The Employment Rights Act 1996 defines a worker as someone who has “entered into or works under a: contract of employment or any other contract, whether express or implied and (if it is express) whether oral or in…

Summary The much-anticipated Supreme Court ruling has been published, with judgement falling in favour of the Uber drivers who have been found, once and for all, to be workers not self-employed. Individuals are categorised into three different categories of 'employment': employee worker self-employed. The criteria by which legal classifications are determined are not laid down in legislation but have largely developed through case law. However, in this case this the Employment Rights…

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that there was not a sufficient amount of control placed over a claimant in order to label him an employee of a company. The term 'employment status' is the arrangement under which an individual is engaged to work for an organisation. There are three labels: ‘employee’, ‘worker’ and ‘self-employed’. It is important to correctly label individuals who work for an organisation, as a false labelling could mean they are missing out on key employment…

Summary The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that foster carers who operated under an agreement with a local authority were employees of that authority. The term 'employment status' is the arrangement under which an individual is engaged to work for an organisation. There are three main categories: employees, hired directly by the organisation workers (for example, casual, agency or freelance workers) the self-employed (for example, contractors). As employees are covered by…

Summary The employment tribunal (ET) has ruled that a hairdresser was an employee, not self-employed, due to the level of control asserted on her by an organisation. ‘Employment status’ refers to the arrangement under which an individual is engaged to work for an organisation. There are three main categories of employment status; employees, workers and the self-employed. Distinguishing between these three labels is important; whilst employees and workers are entitled to a number of employment…

Summary The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has upheld an earlier decision from the employment tribunal (ET), finding a worker supplied from one company to another met the definition of ‘agency worker’ as defined in the law. Law The rules governing the supply and use of agency workers from one organisation to another (the end-user) are found in the Agency Worker Regulations 2010. Regulation 3 defines an ‘agency worker’ as an individual who is supplied by a ‘temporary work agency to work…

Summary The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has assessed whether a gig-economy worker who was able to provide substitutes when doing work for an organisation could still be classed as a ‘worker’ and not ‘self-employed’. UK law outlines that individuals classed as ‘workers’ are those who perform services personally for an organisation that is not considered their client or customer. Examples include casual, agency or freelance workers. In contrast, self-employed individuals are those who…

Summary The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that an out-of-hours GP, who provided her services to the respondent through a separate service organisation, was a ‘worker’ and not ‘self-employed’. Determining the true relationship between an individual and an organisation, and whether the individual amounts to an employee, worker and someone who is self-employed, can be the cause of much confusion. When considering this issue, tribunals will focus on the particular facts of the case…

Summary The employment tribunal (ET) has ruled that dismissing an apprentice prior to the completion of their apprenticeship was in breach of contract. This case concerned an apprentice who entered into an arrangement with an organisation in Scotland, Express Joinery, under the auspices of the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB). This outlined an apprenticeship with an end date of January 2020. During his time working for Express Joinery the apprentice took several days off for…

Summary The Court of Appeal (CA) has dismissed Uber’s appeal against the employment tribunal (ET) and Employment Appeal Tribunal’s (EAT) decision that drivers engaged by Uber were not self-employed contractors, but fell squarely within the legal definition of ‘worker’ under the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the National Minimum Wage Act 1998. This case concerns the claim from two London-based Uber drivers that they should be classed as ‘workers’ and not ‘…

Summary Appeal against finding that part-time worker was treated less favourably is dismissed and case is remitted to the tribunal to determine whether the treatment was objectively justified. Facts Pinaud was employed as a crew member by British Airways from 1985 on a full time basis but began working a part-time shift pattern in 2005. Full-time workers worked a “6/3 pattern” which provided for six days on and three days off. In total, over the course of a year, a full-time crew…

Summary District Judge could not claim whistle-blowing protection as she was solely an office-holder, and not a worker under s230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Individuals are protected against suffering a detriment due to making a protected disclosure if they are a worker under s230(3) Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘ERA’). This defines a worker as an individual who has entered in to, or works under, a contract of employment or any other contract whether express or implied where the…

Summary To be recognised for collective bargaining, the union had to first prove the riders were workers within the statutory definition contained in s296 Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA). Law Within section 296 TULRCA the meaning of worker is defined for the purposes of the applicability of that act.  In this Act worker means an individual who works, or normally works or seeks to work under a contract of employment, or under any other contract whereby…

Summary Were minicab drivers self-employed or workers? Facts Three drivers signed a driver contract that stated they were self-employed and contracted to provide services to Addison Lee as a sub-contractor. The contract also stated there was no obligation to provide services to Addison Lee, nor an obligation on Addison Lee to provide work. The contract stated the drivers chose when to work but were obliged to perform each “customer contract” promptly. The drivers also signed a hire…

Summary Part-time worker paid 50 per cent of comparable full-time worker’s salary whilst working proportionately more than 50 per cent of full-time hours was treated less favourably. Facts Pinaud was employed as a crew member by British Airways from 1985 on a full time basis. After returning from maternity leave in 2005, Pinaud began working a part time shift pattern. The full-time shift pattern was called the “6/3 pattern” and provided for six days on and three days off. Over the year…

Summary ‘Regular casuals’ and employment rights Facts O'Kelly, who worked as a casual wine waiter, was one of several members of staff who were regarded by the employer as 'regular casuals' and who were given priority over other casual staff in terms of the allocation of available work.   He had worked regularly in the hotel for many years until he was discharged, after which he lodged a claim for unfair dismissal. In order for the tribunal to have jurisdiction to hear the claim, O’…

Summary In yet another ‘gig economy’ case, an employment tribunal has decided that a cycle courier was a worker, and not a self-employed contractor.   Dewhurst, a cycle courier working for CitySprint, claimed that she was a worker under the Employment rights Act 1996 and, therefore, entitled to be paid for the two days’ holiday she had taken. ‘Worker’ status would also entitle her to rest breaks and the minimum wage.   Her contract said she was a “self-employed contractor” and not an “…

Summary An employment tribunal has held that drivers engaged by Uber were not self-employed contractors, but fell squarely within the legal definition of ‘worker’ under the Employment Rights Act 1996, the Working Time Regulations 1998 and the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.   Certain employment rights only apply to employees, such as the right not to be unfairly dismissed and the right to a redundancy payment. However, ‘workers’ are also entitled to some rights, including paid holidays and…

Summary The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has decided that district judges are not workers but ‘office holders’ and so do not have the protection provided by the whistleblowing legislation. Recent cases (such as Aslam v Uber) have extended ‘worker’ rights (for example, the right to paid holiday, the minimum wage and whistleblowing protection) to those who previously would have been seen as self-employed. In those cases, courts and tribunals have looked in detail at the substance of what…

Summary In this case, Czech and Algerian court interpreters who regularly worked for only one client (the Ministry of Justice) were unable to bring race claims because there was no mutuality of obligation in their contracts. Two court interpreters, who were on the court service’s National Register of Public Service Interpreters, and who assisted those who did not have English as their first language during court proceedings, were engaged to do work personally on a large number of short term…

Summary This legal challenge may force a change to procedure on spent convictions which has hitherto prevented minor offences from ever being cleared from a person’s criminal record   The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 allows certain ‘spent’ convictions to be removed from criminal records so individuals do not have to disclose them in specific circumstances. Where regulated activities are involved, such as working with children and vulnerable adults, both spent and unspent…

Summary This case confirmed that under the EU’s temporary agency workers directive and the UK’s regulations that implement it, all workers are entitled to equal access to information on internal job vacancies, but permanent employees can be given priority when those vacancies are filled.   Under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010, temporary agency workers are entitled to equal treatment compared with permanent employees over their fundamental terms of employment, such as pay rates and…

Summary Application of collective consultation requirements to employees on fixed-term contracts. Facts The claimants were employed under fixed-term contracts which they had each agreed would come to an end at a particular date or at the end of a specific project. When their contracts came to an end and were not renewed, their union argued that the employer had failed to carry out collective consultation (for redundancy) according to s188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (…