Case 4106678/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Miller v James Cowie & Co Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4106678/2017
- Decision date
- 8 February 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mary Kearns
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Miller
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Miller was employed by James Cowie & Co Ltd as a blacksmith erector from 3 June 2013 until 20 June 2017. In June 2017, while attending induction for work on the Queensferry Crossing contract, he tested positive for cocaine, was removed from site, suspended without pay, and then summarily dismissed following a disciplinary hearing on 19 June 2017. His appeal was unsuccessful.
The tribunal accepted that the respondent later realised suspension without pay had been unlawful and attempted to pay the claimant the sums due. It found the correct suspension pay was £819 gross, less tax of £109.60, National Insurance of £47.01 and an employee pension contribution of £4.35. The respondent also identified that it had overpaid the claimant by 3 days' holiday from the previous holiday year, amounting to £270.25, and after clawing this back the net sum due was £387.79, which the claimant accepted had been paid electronically.
In relation to holiday pay, the tribunal found the claimant's contractual holiday year ran from 1 September to 31 August and that he had taken 18 days' holiday in the 2016/17 year. Pro-rating to his leaving date of 19 June 2017, he was entitled to 22.5 days, meaning 4.5 days accrued but untaken holiday. The respondent had paid holiday pay on 23 June 2017 calculated as 59 hours at £10.50 per hour, plus a holiday supplement, but it also deducted £265 for three training courses under a training agreement signed on 29 March 2016 that authorised deductions for sums owed under the agreement.
The tribunal held that, on the facts found, the claimant had been paid all sums to which he was entitled and his claims for arrears of pay and holiday pay did not succeed. It also noted an issue raised at the hearing about a £1.30 per week deduction for laundering work overalls, but because no such claim was contained in the ET1 it could not make any judgment on that matter, citing Chapman v Simon 1994 IRLR 124 CA. The case was dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found the claimant had been paid the sums due in respect of suspension pay and that the remaining deduction issue raised at the hearing concerning £1.30 per week for laundering overalls was not pleaded in the ET1, so no judgment could be made on it. The claim was dismissed because all sums claimed were treated as having been paid. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The tribunal found the claimant was entitled to 4.5 days accrued but untaken holiday on termination, but the respondent had initially paid holiday pay on the basis of 7.5 days, then deducted training course fees under the signed training agreement. The tribunal concluded the claimant had nevertheless been paid all sums to which he was entitled and dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.