Worker versus Self-Employed

Pimlico Plumbers Ltd versus Smith

This recent ruling by the Supreme Court highlights the perennial difficulties that parties face in determining the legal status of an individual for employment law purposes.

The Supreme Court upheld judgments of an employment tribunal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal in deciding that Mr Smith, a plumber who had been engaged for Pimlico Plumbers for approximately five and a half years, was a worker for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Working Time Regulations 1998.

This finding was despite Mr Smith’s contract labelling him as an independent contractor. This illustrates that the courts can and will disregard the express terms of a contract if it is clear that the parties do not operate in accordance with them (see the 2011 decision of Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher). Courts will scratch below the contractual surface and any opportune labels contained therein in order to ascertain the reality of an employment relationship.

In this particular case, the Supreme Court based its decision on, among other things, the following key factors:

  1. Personal service was a dominant feature of Mr Smith’s contract and the right to substitute was fettered to such an extent as to not be worthy of recognition.
  2. Mr Smith was required to drive a Pimlico Plumber branded van, wear a Pimlico Plumber uniform and carry a Pimlico Plumber identity card.
  3. There was an obligation on Mr Smith to work a minimum of forty hours per week.
  4. Mr Smith’s contract contained restrictive covenants that effectively precluded him from working as a plumber in the Greater London area for three months following termination.

The overall picture clearly illustrated that Pimlico Plumbers exercised tight control over Mr Smith and pointed away from him being a truly independent contractor.

Concerns have been voiced that this decision, being binding on the lower courts, will have huge ramifications for the gig economy with many more so-called independent contractors demanding employment rights. However, this viewpoint fails to recognise that the decision, as with many employment status cases, is highly fact-sensitive and is, therefore, unlikely to have much precedent value.

CONTACT CHRIS

If you would like more information or advice relating to this article or an Employment law matter, please do not hesitate to contact Chris Cook on 01727 798098.

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
SA Law Employment Laptop
Views & Insights
Don't ask about salary history if you want to improve the gender pay gap

Christine Caffrey and Simon Walsh discuss gender pay gap issues with Elite Business

Read More
SA Law Corporate
Views & Insights
How mishandling sexual harassment claims can damage a business

Vincent Billings and Gita Patel share comments for an article on Reward Strategy

Read More
SA Law Employment Laptop
Views & Insights
Co-op shop floor workers win equal pay row

Reward Strategy has published an article featuring comments from Beth Leng

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 - Lightbulbs image with fillament
Views & Insights
Exceptional feedback secures rankings in UK law firms guide

Chambers & Partners 2022 research has again resulted in rankings for four of SA Law’s legal teams, as well as for six individual lawyers.

Read More
SA Law Employment Laptop
Views & Insights
Employee status – what’s in a label?

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

Read More
Stained glass window Employment SA Law
Views & Insights
How more widespread flexible working could improve equality

The pandemic has altered perceptions of flexible working for the better. As we move forward, it could be the key to unlocking true gender equality in…

Read More
SA Law Employment Laptop
Views & Insights
Gender-critical beliefs capable of protection by Equality Act

A woman who lost her job after tweeting that people cannot change their biological sex has won her appeal against an employment tribunal

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 2022

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.