Mr Richard Murphy v Lawhill Services Ltd — 2019

Mr Richard Murphy began work for Lawhill Services Ltd on or about 11 December 2018 as a shop assistant. He repeatedly raised questions with Mr Abdul Noor about holiday entitlement and also complained that his cash payments and pay slips did not match the hours he had actually worked. The respondent did not present a response or appear at the hearing, and the tribunal accepted the claimant as a truthful and reliable witness.

On 30 April 2019 the claimant emailed Mr Noor setting out disputes about holiday entitlement and wage shortfalls, including sums said to be outstanding for December 2018, January, February and April 2019. The following day Mr Noor texted him saying he was giving one week’s notice to find another job. The tribunal accepted the claimant’s evidence that the job was then advertised and that replacement candidates were being interviewed while he was still working. It inferred that the principal reason for dismissal was that he had alleged infringement of statutory rights, and therefore found automatic unfair dismissal under section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

For remedy, the tribunal found that the claimant remained unemployed 24 weeks after dismissal and was making genuine efforts to find work. It assessed his loss by reference to 30 weeks’ pay at £262.06 per week and awarded £7,861.80 as compensatory compensation. The tribunal stated that there was no basic award.

The tribunal also upheld the wage deduction and holiday pay claims. It found that £126.68 remained unpaid for hours worked, and that the holiday pay payment made on 30 April 2019 was short by £10.26 because it should have been paid at the minimum wage rate then current. The final award was £8,008.74.