0-hours court rulings - how will they impact UK businesses

you may be right, but you will still lose

A case of unfair dismissal made by the Employment Tribunal in December 2020 has highlighted how important this can be. SME’s may hold the belief that large companies would always take the correct approach but this tribunal ruling has illustrated that, whatever the size of the business, and in this case, Jaguar Land Rover, any deviation can be costly.

An employee, Mr Rumbold, had been absent for 808 shifts in his 20-year career at Jaguar Land Rover. It was estimated that during that time, he had received £95,850 in sick pay. The reasons for Mr. Rumbold’s absence were varied but up until 2018, Jaguar Land Rover had not followed any absence management protocols as detailed in their company procedures. Following a five month period of absence in 2018, a return to work interview was conducted and a number of alternative positions were offered to Mr. Rumbold but none of the roles were suitable.

In November 2018, an investigation was conducted into Mr Rumbold’s absence levels and a decision was made to terminate his employment.

Mr. Rumbold subsequently submitted a claim to the Employment Tribunal.

At the tribunal, there was overwhelming evidence suggesting Mr Rumbold was not a fit and proper person to work for Jaguar Land Rover. Despite this, Mr Rumbold won his claim of unfair dismissal.

This was as a result of the company’s failure to follow its own absence management policy. The compensatory award that Mr. Rumbold will receive has yet to be confirmed. absence triggers and mechanisms and supports the reporting and management of both long-term and shortterm absence.

If you don’t currently use an absence management portal, please contact us to arrange a demo.

advo hr always recommend reviewing company policies and procedures prior to taking any action with regards to any employee related matter.

This ruling will undoubtedly set a precedent and demonstrates how important it is for all companies, whatever their size, to follow internal policies.

This is even more important if policies are contractual as there may be a further claim for breach of contract. advo hr are here to help and support you. Please contact us for guidance and we will discuss and take you through the steps to take before making any employee related decision.

You can email advohr@advogroup.co.uk to start a conversation.

It is therefore vital that before taking any action or making any decision to dismiss an employee, to ensure that all policies and procedures have been followed and all options considered.

We would remind you to record all absences on the advo absence management portal, which is provided free of charge as part of the HR service offered.

This tool enables accurate recording of sickness,

court rulings on 0-hours

In February 2021, the Supreme Court decided under UK employment law, Uber drivers were classified as ‘workers’ and entitled to work benefits such as paid holiday, pension contributions and minimum wage.

What is the gig economy?

The gig economy has arisen based on flexible, temporary, or freelance jobs, often involving connecting with customers through an online platform i.e., Deliveroo. Such workers enter into formal agreements with on-demand companies to provide services to the company’s clients. This model resulted in a ‘grey area’, as to whether these contractors were self employed, or employed. Uber had previously argued that the drivers were independent, third-party contractors.

Implications

This may impact your business if you have independent contractors, online platform workers, contract firm workers, on-call workers or temporary workers as the ruling paves the way for such workers to receive basic employment protections. This will shape future cases concerning the gig economy. Businesses operating in a similar manner to Uber are likely to face a similar raft of claims from their contractors, and compensating workers for the benefits they should have received could be costly. It doesn’t mean, however, that all businesses using ‘gig’ workers will have to give them worker status.

In the Uber case, the Supreme Court noted that the tight control over drivers, who were effectively at Uber’s beck and call under contract terms dictated to them, meant that drivers could not be considered independent contractors. The only way for drivers to earn more money was to work longer hours. Uber, after months of resistance, conceded defeat and recently announced all its 70,000 contractors will now have ‘worker’ status, showing the shift in recognition towards ‘gig’ economy workers. This will shape the future for employment rights to be applied. Businesses need to consider how costs will be absorbed and how this will impact their service provision to their customers.

Five key questions for businesses

The Supreme Court considered five key areas of Uber’s relationship with its drivers. For businesses that recognise similarities in the way contractors or gig workers are used, consideration should be given as to if they can genuinely be classed as self-employed. If they cannot be classed as self-employed, they should be afforded the same rights as employees in respect to holiday, pension entitlement, and minimum wage. Think about and ask yourself:

1. How much control over the contractors’ work do we exercise? 2. Do we give them the equipment for performing those services? 3. Do we allow contractors to delegate or sub-contract the service? 4. What degree of financial risk do the respective parties take? 5. Can the contractors manage the way they work or the volume of work they undertake for us? 6. Does your contractor have influence in these areas? This is a complex area and if you believe the Uber judgement may impacts your business, please get in contact with us as we can offer further support and advice.