Dominic Pickin v Total Security Services Limited — 2022

The tribunal extended time for the unlawful deduction from wages claim. It found it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time, taking into account that the claimant was a litigant in person and the medical evidence showing stress, anxiety, low mood, and a surgical procedure relating to a prostate tumour.

On the merits, the tribunal found that the claimant’s contract as a Security Officer provided for variable shifts each week, did not guarantee a minimum number of hours, and provided no contractual sick pay beyond statutory sick pay. Following an altercation at Tesco on or about 24 January 2021, Tesco asked for the claimant to be removed from that store. The respondent mistakenly told him on about 5 February 2021 that he was suspended, but corrected that error by 11 February 2021 and confirmed on 12 February 2021 that he was not suspended and was eligible to work at other sites.

The tribunal found that the claimant was available for work from 2 February 2021 until he was signed unfit for work from 10 March 2021, but that he did not in fact work after 1 February 2021. It held that the real issue was whether wages were properly payable under the contract. Because the contract did not require the respondent to provide a minimum number of shifts and the claimant was paid for shifts actually worked, the tribunal found that no wages had been deducted. The claim for unlawful deductions from wages for the period before sickness absence was therefore dismissed.

The tribunal also dismissed the claim for pay for the period from 11 March 2021 to 23 September 2021. It found that, during sickness absence, the claimant was entitled only to statutory sick pay under the contract. The tribunal further held that it had no power, within an unlawful deduction from wages claim, to award the separate compensation sought by the claimant for the way he said he had been treated.