Mr E Radkevics v And and 1 other — 2019

The tribunal found that Mr E Radkevics was an employee from 1 August 2016, engaged as a vehicle repair technician on a salary of £15,000 a year plus a contractual bonus of £200 per week. It accepted that he worked under the respondents' direction and control, was integrated into the business, and was not given a compliant written statement of terms. It rejected the suggestion that he had agreed to a self-employed arrangement or asked to be paid the odd monthly figure relied on by the respondents.

The tribunal found that on 9 August 2019 the claimant raised concerns with colleagues about payslips and tax/NIC deductions, and that the second respondent then told him, in substance, that because he was 'born in Milton Keynes' and knew people in the repair business locally, he would not get another job there. It accepted that the claimant was later presented with documents recording termination by mutual agreement and then alleged verbal resignation. The tribunal held that the claimant resigned on 12 August 2019 in response to repudiatory breaches of the implied term of trust and confidence, namely failure to pay HMRC the sums deducted from pay, failure to provide payslips, threats to sack him if he did not sign untruthful documents, and goading him to resign. It therefore upheld unfair dismissal, and also found the dismissal was automatically unfair under s.104 ERA 1996 because he had complained about the failure to provide payslips/statutory rights.

The race-related harassment claim was dismissed. Although the claimant relied on the 'born in Milton Keynes' comment, the tribunal found the evidence did not support an inference that the conduct was related to race or nationality/origin. It also made a wrongful dismissal award of £1,206.57 for three weeks' notice, and upheld the unlawful deductions claim in the sum of £788.04 for the £12.34 monthly shortfall and the unpaid six days in August 2019. A separate higher award of £1,954.54 was made under s.38 Employment Act 2002 for failure to provide a compliant written statement of particulars. The unfair dismissal remedy comprised a basic award of £1,465.98 and a compensatory award of £27,706.92, with no ACAS uplift; the recoupment regulations applied, with a prescribed element of £27,035.86 and excess of £6,086.19. The tribunal made no award for future loss.