Case 3202424/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr T Sodipo v My Locum — 2020
- Case reference
- 3202424/2018
- Decision date
- 13 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Jones Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr T Sodipo
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr T Sodipo, registered with My Locum in May 2017 to provide healthcare assistant services to NHS Trust hospitals. He accepted shifts on an assignment-by-assignment basis, could refuse work offered to him, and was not supervised by the respondent while on shift. The tribunal found he was not an employee, but was a worker and, on the facts, an agency worker for the respondent.
The main complaint under section 13 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was that he had not been paid a flat rate for whole night shifts. The tribunal accepted the respondent's evidence that the rates applied reflected the NHS London Procurement Partnership framework, including different rates for day, night, Saturday, Sunday and bank holiday hours, and that the claimant had been told about the pay structure. It held that the claimant failed to show any breach of NHS terms or any contractual term requiring a single flat rate for the whole shift.
The claimant also said he had been forced to use IPS Countrywide and that the respondent should refund deductions made by that umbrella company. The tribunal found that the claimant chose whether to work through IPS, Elite Management & Consultancy, or on a PAYE basis, and that there was no evidence of compulsion or coercion by the respondent. It found that the respondent had no control over the fees charged by IPS and was not responsible for the deductions made from the claimant's pay.
The claims were therefore dismissed in full. The tribunal made no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant advanced two complaints within the wages claim: alleged underpayment for night shifts and alleged responsibility for deductions made by the umbrella company IPS Countrywide/related entities. The tribunal found he was a worker but not an employee, held that the respondent had paid shift rates in line with the NHS London Procurement Partnership framework, and found no evidence that the respondent coerced him into using IPS or was responsible for IPS's fees or deductions. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 13 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 230 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Ready Mixed Concrete test
- Byrne Brothers v Baird factors
- James v London Borough of Greenwich
- Cairns v Visteon Ltd
- Secretary of State v Windle & Arada
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.