Ms E Ayiwe v Allcures plc — 2024

This was a preliminary hearing on the Claimant’s employment status, length of service, and whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and holiday-pay unlawful deductions complaints. The Claimant was a pharmacist in the Respondent’s locum pool. The hearing was conducted by CVP on 12 December 2023 and the reserved judgment was dated 5 January 2024. The Tribunal found there was no written agreement between the parties and that the Claimant had long periods of engagement as a locum, including at the ETR branch, but the case was concerned only with status and jurisdiction, not the substantive reason her engagement ended on 13 March 2023.

The Tribunal held that the Claimant was not an employee. It accepted that the relationship took place in a regulated healthcare setting and that there was some control over how she worked, but found control was not decisive. The critical finding was that there was no mutuality of obligations: the Respondent was not obliged to offer work and the Claimant was not obliged to accept it. She could decline shifts, make herself unavailable, and take extended absences including December and overseas travel without seeking permission. The Tribunal also relied on the absence of other employee features such as set hours, salary by BACS, pension membership, and entitlement to sick pay or maternity pay.

The Tribunal then considered worker status and held that the Claimant was a worker. It found that she undertook to perform work personally, subject only to a limited and rarely used ability to arrange a suitably qualified substitute with the Respondent’s approval. Although she was integrated into the Respondent’s operations, used its equipment, participated in training and a flu vaccine commission scheme, and at times helped with staff matters, the Tribunal concluded that the Respondent was not her client or customer. On that basis, the complaint of unlawful deductions from wages relating to holiday pay was allowed to proceed, while the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal complaints were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.