In person. For the v Mr D Mitchell — 2020

The tribunal found that the claimant worked as a vehicle recovery driver from 4 June 2018 to 10 December 2018. It held that the Working Time Regulations 1998 applied, not EC Regulation 561/2006, because the respondent's vehicles operated within 100km of base. On the first contract, the parties had agreed 12-hour shifts paid at £9 per hour for 10 paid hours with a one-hour unpaid break, and the tribunal rejected the respondent's case that the handbook created an agreed 13-hour night shift. It found that the written contract dated 17 July 2018 had been sent but never signed or returned.

On unlawful deduction of wages, the tribunal found that overtime was payable under the first contract when the claimant worked beyond the agreed hours, and that the respondent's overtime policy of rounding to the nearest quarter hour had been the contractual basis throughout. It accepted some overtime items, including the night-shift claims for work between 3am and 4am and certain individual disputed shifts, but rejected others where the VAR, MDT and timesheet evidence did not support the claim. It also rejected any general entitlement to payment for skates, but accepted one winching payment of £30 where the relevant client agreement allowed extra charges. The on-call hours claim failed because the pay received under both contracts remained above the National Living Wage.

The Working Time Regulations claims for rest breaks and daily rest were dismissed. Although the tribunal accepted that recovery drivers were working while waiting for jobs, it found that the nature of the work involved continuity of service, so regulation 21(c) applied. It held that, where breaks were delayed, the respondent had where possible allowed equivalent compensatory rest under regulation 24(a), and that the pattern of four shifts on followed by two rest days either provided compensatory rest for missed daily rest or, alternatively, appropriate protection under regulation 24(b). The annual leave claim succeeded because the claimant had been paid for only 10 of 13.7 days' leave; the remaining 3.7 days were valued at £399.60. The claim for pension contributions was dismissed because the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to determine that type of claim. The total award was £705.60.