Mr G Stanley v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2021

The claimant remained employed by the respondent on legacy terms after choosing not to opt into the Fair and Sustainable terms introduced in 2012. He argued that because he was being required to perform duties associated with a B4 officer, he should be paid the B4 rate under the Fair and Sustainable terms whether or not he had opted into them.

The tribunal found that the claimant continued to be employed under the legacy terms and had not identified anything in those terms, or any other legal entitlement, giving him a right to be paid at the Fair and Sustainable B4 rate for performing his current duties. Although there appeared to be some confusion in the Fair and Sustainable document about mapping to B3 or B4 roles, the tribunal found that document was of very limited relevance to the wages claim because the claimant had not opted into those terms.

The tribunal concluded that the claimant had not proved he was paid less than an amount legally payable to him, so no unauthorised deduction from wages had been made. It noted that the dispute was realistically about duties rather than pay, which was not a question to be determined in an unauthorised deductions claim.