In Person For the v Respondent — 2024

The tribunal heard a claim by Mr A Simonds against BMW Hams Hall Motoren GmbH concerning sick pay. The agreed issue was whether sick pay for the period 26 July 2023 to 23 November 2023 was properly payable, and if so how much was owed. The tribunal recorded that Mr Simonds had been employed as a Machinist from 17 September 1990 until his resignation with effect from 18 January 2024, and had been absent from work due to sickness from 29 September 2022 until 23 November 2023.

The tribunal found that the respondent’s handbook provided for up to 52 weeks of basic salary during sick leave for eligible employees, calculated on a rolling basis, and that after that point any further extension was discretionary and subject to review. Mr Simonds had received sick pay until 25 July 2023 and accepted in cross-examination that he had no entitlement to sick pay beyond that date. The tribunal accepted the respondent’s evidence that extensions were reserved for serious cases such as terminal or life-threatening illness, and that Mr Simonds’s illness did not fall within those categories. It also found that the respondent had considered his request in good faith, that two other employees had been refused extended sick pay for the same reasons, and that Mr Simonds had been certified fit to return to work from 24 November 2023.

The tribunal also noted that the respondent supported an application under its income protection scheme, but the insurer rejected it. It found that Mr Simonds did not wish to return to work and had sought an exit package from April 2023 onwards, but that did not create an entitlement to further sick pay. Applying section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the authorities cited in submissions, the tribunal concluded that the sick pay claimed for 26 July 2023 to 23 November 2023 was not properly payable. The claim for unlawful deduction from wages therefore failed and was dismissed.