Case 1402428/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A White v Swissport GB Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1402428/2019
- Decision date
- 28 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mulvaney Representation
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A White
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal considered the claimant's complaint that he had not received his full statutory annual leave entitlement under the Working Time Regulations 1998. Applying the respondent's eight-week roster pattern, the tribunal found that the claimant worked an average of 4.375 days per week and that 5.6 weeks' leave therefore equated to 24.5 days rather than 28 days. Using the claimant's average working day of 8.6 hours, the tribunal concluded that 210 hours was the correct annual leave entitlement.
The tribunal accepted that, for a worker on variable-length shifts, it was appropriate to convert leave entitlement into hours. It therefore held that the respondent's calculation of 210 hours was correct and lawful, and that the claimant had received his full entitlement in 2018. Although the tribunal concluded that the respondent had under-calculated the claimant's leave in part of 2017, that aspect was out of time and there was no continuing default.
On the sick pay complaint, the tribunal did not make a substantive finding that deductions had been wrongly made. It held that there was no evidence of loss during the period covered by the claim, and that the example relied on by the claimant related to a date after the claim had been presented. The tribunal dismissed that complaint. It also expressed concern that employees were not given regular information showing their running holiday entitlement and remaining balance.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working time regulations | The tribunal held the respondent's calculation of 210 hours' annual leave for the claimant's shift pattern was correct and lawful. It also found any miscalculation for 2017 was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The sick pay complaint was dismissed because there was no evidence of loss during the period covered by the claim, and the example relied on post-dated presentation of the claim so the tribunal made no finding on it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- regulations 13 and 13A Working Time Regulations 1998
- Kreuziger v Land Berlin C-619/16 ECJ
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.