In person For the v Ms I Terescuk (HR Manager) — 2023

The claimant brought three complaints: unlawful deduction from wages concerning her uniform, unlawful deduction from wages based on an alleged entitlement to 48 hours' work per week, and unpaid holiday pay. At the hearing she withdrew the latter two complaints, and the tribunal dismissed them.

The remaining issue was the uniform deduction. The claimant had worked for the respondent from 11 October 2022 to 22 October 2022 as Head Waitress. She accepted that she had received and signed the employment contract, and the tribunal recorded a contractual deductions clause allowing the respondent to recover the reasonable replacement cost of equipment or property entrusted to the employee if it was not returned before leaving employment.

The tribunal found, on the balance of probabilities, that the claimant had not returned the three shirts, the apron, the tie, or the locker key. It preferred Ms Terescuk's evidence on the disputed facts, found the respondent's assigned replacement values reasonable, and held that the contract was a relevant provision for the purposes of section 13 ERA 1996 because the claimant had been given a copy of it before the deduction was made. The deduction of £152, made up of £90 for the shirts, £57 for the apron and tie, and £5 for the locker key, was therefore lawful and the uniform complaint failed.