Employee status – what’s in a label?

SA Law's employment team explore the importance of establishing 'employment status'

The issue of employment status is a muddled, yet essential, issue for organisations and individuals. The distinction between ‘employee’, ‘worker’ and ‘self-employed’ is highly contested, and for good reason; many important legal rights are only available to employees, and an increasing number of statutory rights are available to workers but not those self-employed.

The Supreme Court ruling in Uber BV and ors v Aslam and ors [2021] made all the headlines earlier this year, but the recent judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in the case of Nursing and Midwifery Council v Somerville [2021] has also provided some important guidance on this issue.

Nursing and Midwifery Council v Somerville

Mr Somerville was appointed by the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) as a panel chair. He brought a claim against the NMC for holiday pay. At the initial hearing in July 2020, the East London Employment Tribunal (ET) held that the claimant was not an employee as he was under no obligation to accept and perform a minimum amount of work (known as an irreducible minimum of obligation). It did, however, find him to be a ‘worker’ via the series of individual contracts which arose each time he agreed to sit, giving rise to an overarching contract in relation to the provision of his services.

The NMC appealed this decision, arguing that the lack of an irreducible minimum of obligation was inconsistent with ‘worker’ status. This argument was rejected by the EAT, which concluded that an irreducible minimum of obligation was not a prerequisite for ‘worker’ status. It did not accept that the findings in Uber meant that an irreducible minimum of obligation was a requirement for worker status. Instead, it held that:

  • There was a contract to perform work or services between the parties at all material times;
  • The Claimant had agreed to provide his services personally at each sitting;
  • The Claimant provided his services under an overarching agreement; and
  • Each of these occasions was the subject of a specific contract between the parties.

Comment

The ruling of the EAT gives further hope to those in the ‘gig economy’ of establishing worker status and the benefits that come with it. It also acts as a warning to employers when classifying individuals as self-employed. 

CONTACT BETH

If you would like more information or advice relating to this article or an Employment law matter, please do not hesitate to contact Beth Leng on 01727 798046.

Read the latest Employment Views & Insights
They seek to understand their clients and advise accordingly to achieve the outcomes that they require for their business needs.
Chambers and Partners
SA Law Work Life red mug and glasses
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
This Week’s Fine Imposed on Facebook Data

In a recently written article published in The Legal Diary, Christine Caffrey was asked to comment on the news of Facebook being fined €1.2bn…

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Government Announces Changes to Working Time Regulations, TUPE and Non-Compete Clauses

Emily Morrison discusses the significant changes announced by the Government on Working Time Regulations, TUPE and Non-Compete Clauses.

Read More
SA Law Employment Laptop
Views & Insights
Employee Sabbaticals: Business Benefits and Tips on Getting the Policy Right

Gita Patel outlines the business benefits of offering sabbatical leave to employees.

Read More
Phone Box with Man in a Bowler Hat
As there is so much expertise on offer from SA Law they can provide a legal expert on all areas so that it can be handled under one roof.
Legal 500
SA Law Employment Laptop
Views & Insights
Employment Law Update

James Cresswell and Nishma Chudasama discuss the 5 legal updates employers need to know this April.

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Can Legal Action be Taken Against Discriminatory Recruitment Criteria?

It has been ruled by several employment tribunals that gender critical beliefs should not be discriminated against in the workplace, and any discriminatory…

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Consultation on Holiday Pay Following Harpur Trust v Brazel

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has concluded its consultation in response to the Harpur Trust v Brazel case, which…

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
Changes to look out for from the Spring Budget 2023

Getting people “back into work” is the main focus of Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s Spring Budget announced on 15 March 2023. The reform will impact employees…

Read More
They are knowledgeable, with a commercial mindset, but also down to earth and friendly so it is easy to be very honest with them.
Chambers and Partners

© SA LAW 2023

Every care is taken in the preparation of our articles. However, no responsibility can be accepted to any person who acts on the basis of information contained in them alone. You are recommended to obtain specific advice in respect of individual cases.