Mr S Ramdut v ID Medical Group Limited — 2022

Mr S Ramdut, a mental health nurse, worked for The ID Medical Group at the Isle of Wight NHS Trust from 2 March 2020 to 19 July 2020. The dispute concerned unpaid wages arising from that assignment, together with travel expenses and accommodation deductions. The tribunal found that Paybox operated only as a vehicle for receiving fees and making payments, and that there was no agreement that travel expenses would be paid. It accepted that accommodation costs were properly deductible, but noted that the claimant had originally disputed the correct rate of pay and the handling of his timesheets.

Applying s.230(3) ERA 1996 and the authorities cited in the judgment, including Uber BV v Aslam, Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v Smith, Byrne Brothers Formwork Ltd v Baird, Hospital Medical Group v Westwood and Nursing and Midwifery Council v Somerville, the tribunal found that the claimant had personal service obligations but was not a worker. It held that the respondent was in substance a customer of a business carried on by the claimant, who chose when and where to work, was not integrated into the respondent's business to any significant degree, was subject to no meaningful control by the respondent, worked through agencies, and bore his own expenses apart from part of the accommodation costs.

On the wage issue, the tribunal found that the respondent had initially failed to pay the claimant for hours worked when authorised timesheets were missing, and that this did amount to an unauthorised deduction in relation to the undisputed hours. However, after the missing timesheets were produced, the respondent arranged payment via the claimant's umbrella company. The tribunal recorded payment of £23,934.22 including VAT, or £19,922.40 excluding VAT, for the hours on the timesheets, and calculated that 710.4 hours at £28.65 came to £20,352.96 before deducting accommodation, producing £19,623.96. It therefore considered the respondent's calculation broadly correct, or possibly a small overpayment, and concluded that the claimant had been paid in full for the work done.

The claim for unauthorised deduction from wages was dismissed. The tribunal said that even if it had been wrong about worker status, it would not have made any remedy award because the wages issue had been resolved by payment and the Act does not permit compensation for stress or depressed feelings in this type of claim.