Mrs Laura-Jean Harkin v Master Peace Recruitment Ltd and 2 others — 2022

The tribunal held that Mrs Laura-Jean Harkin was a worker and that Master Peace Recruitment Ltd, the first respondent, was her employer for the purposes of Part II of the Employment Rights Act 1996 from 26 April 2019 until 4 February 2022. It rejected the case that she had been employed by a succession of payroll entities, finding that the portal contracts and payslip arrangements did not reflect the reality of the relationship. The claims against the second to fifth respondents were dismissed.

On holiday pay, the tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that Mr Aitken agreed an hourly rate of £18 and that this was not transparently stated to be inclusive of holiday pay. It found that the respondents' 12.07% method was based on the statutory minimum holiday entitlement and was wrong because the claimant was entitled to 37.5 days' holiday per year under the Council arrangement, including during maternity leave. Applying the two-year limit in the Deductions from Wages (Limitation) Regulations 2014 and treating the underpayments as a series of deductions, the tribunal calculated holiday pay due at £9,773.93 before set-off, then deducted payments of £530.54 and £882.00, leaving £8,361.39.

The tribunal also found that the claimant had not been paid the 2% Council pay rise backdated to 1 January 2021, and awarded £470.09 for that underpayment. It dismissed the pension contribution issue because employer pension contributions were not wages payable to the claimant within section 27 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal reserved for 28 days the separate question whether to impose a financial penalty on the first respondent, and the total award was £8,831.48 gross, subject to necessary statutory deductions.