Dr Z Jones v UK Health Security Agency — 2023

Dr Z Jones brought four complaints of automatically unfair dismissal under s.103A ERA 1996. One complaint was withdrawn, and the remaining three were consolidated. She also applied for interim relief under s.128 ERA 1996, but that application had already been refused at an earlier hearing. This judgment was a preliminary issue hearing before Employment Judge B McKenna sitting alone, limited to whether she was an employee of UK Health Security Agency for the purposes of s.103A.

The tribunal found that Dr Jones had entered into a contract of employment with MyPay Limited and was assigned to the respondent through the Public Sector Resourcing framework operated by Alexander Mann Solutions. It accepted the respondent’s evidence that, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it needed contingent workers quickly and that the contractual arrangements reflected a genuine agency/umbrella-company structure. The tribunal held that features relied on by Dr Jones, including reporting to Dr Grimsley, onboarding, inclusion on an organogram, and common leave procedures, were consistent with agency working and were not enough to imply a direct contract of employment with the respondent.

Applying the agency-case authorities, including James v Greenwich and Tilson v Alstom, the tribunal held that there was no necessity or business reality requiring a contract of employment to be implied between Dr Jones and the respondent. The short duration of the assignment, from 1 November 2021 to 17 November 2021, did not support any conclusion that the written arrangements had been superseded, and the tribunal found no basis to treat the arrangements as a sham. It also rejected the submission that resemblance to civil service staff was enough to establish employee status.

Because Dr Jones was not found to be an employee of UK Health Security Agency, the s.103A automatically unfair dismissal claim could not proceed and was struck out for lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal noted that she had protected-disclosure detriment rights under s.47B ERA 1996 in principle, but no detriment complaint had been pleaded and no amendment had been sought.