Case 3306578/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Bailey v Premier MiniBus & Coach Hire Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3306578/2020
- Decision date
- 27 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hyams Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Bailey
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs S Bailey worked for Premier MiniBus & Coach Hire Limited from November 2019 until 29 August 2020 as an assistant on passenger transport for children and young people with special educational needs. The tribunal noted a self-employed arrangement with Keydriver signed on 17 March 2020, but the parties were content to treat her as not having become self-employed for furlough purposes. A payment of £718.38 from Keydriver on 15 April 2020 was relevant to the accounting between the parties.
The tribunal accepted the respondent's calculation that the claimant's furlough rate was £13.64 per day, being 80% of pay calculated by reference to the respondent's records and DWP guidance. It found the claimant was owed £249.18 for furlough pay up to 29 June 2020 and a further £832.04 for 61 days from 30 June to 29 August 2020, making £1,081.22 in total. That sum was awarded under the contract claim, subject to deduction and payment of income tax and national insurance contributions as required by PAYE.
The unpaid wages claim, relating to work done before the first lockdown, was dismissed. The tribunal found the claimant's own calculation of 362.3 hours at £8.21 per hour produced an entitlement of £2,974.48, while her documents showed payments totalling £2,988.84, including the £718.38 Keydriver payment. As she had been paid more than her entitlement on her own figures, the tribunal concluded the claim for unpaid wages failed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim advanced as furlough pay and then treated as a claim for sums due under a contract connected with employment under section 3 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 and article 3 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. | Upheld | — | £1,081 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unpaid wages for work done before the first lockdown. The tribunal found the claimant's own documents showed she had been paid more than her stated entitlement for that period, so the claim failed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £1,081
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 3 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996
- article 3 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.