Case 4104280/2023 · Employment Tribunal
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104280/2023 Hearing by Cloud Video Platform at Edinburgh on December 2023 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Jennifer Loy v Community Integrated Care — 2023
- Case reference
- 4104280/2023
- Decision date
- 21 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
Parties
2 namedClaimant
ETZ 4(WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4104280/2023 Hearing by Cloud Video Platform at Edinburgh on December 2023 Employment Judge: M A Macleod Jennifer Loy
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal found that the central issue was the claimant’s status after 1 April 2023. It held that, after raising the possibility of “going Bank” because she could not work Fridays, the claimant agreed both verbally and in writing to move from her full-time contract to bank work. The tribunal found that a signed bank contract was not a condition of that change taking effect.
On that basis, the tribunal found that from 1 April 2023 the claimant was a bank worker rather than an employee, with no mutuality of obligation: the respondent was not obliged to offer shifts and the claimant was not obliged to accept them. The tribunal did not accept that the claimant had been forced or pressured into the change, noting that she had been offered the option of making a flexible working request and only submitted that request several weeks later.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claims for notice pay, pay for shifts the claimant said she should have been offered, and holiday pay. It found that a bank worker was only entitled to pay for shifts actually worked, that the claimant did not work after moving to the bank, and that the payslips showed holiday pay had been paid so no unlawful deduction was proved.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Treated as the claim for arrears of pay/payment for shifts the claimant said she should have been offered. The tribunal held she was a bank worker from 1 April 2023 and was only entitled to pay for shifts actually worked. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal considered entitlement to paid annual leave under the Working Time Regulations 1998, found the respondent had paid outstanding holiday pay, and found no unlawful deduction proved. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Treated as the notice pay claim. The tribunal held that as a bank worker the claimant was not entitled to notice pay. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Working Time Regulations 1998 as amended
- mutuality of obligation
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.