Mr J McCafferty v Project Health and Safety Services Ltd — 2019

The claimant worked for Project Health and Safety Services Ltd as a Health & Safety Adviser from 10 March 2017 to 3 May 2018. He did not have a written contract. The tribunal found that he was allocated weekly work which he was obliged to complete, undertook the work personally, worked most weekdays, did not work for anyone else, wore the respondent's branded clothing, carried its business cards, attended team meetings and weekly conference calls, and submitted weekly invoices. It found the respondent paid him at set rates of £150 for travelling and working at home, £175 for site inspections including investigations, and £250 for training.

Applying the authorities it cited, including Autoclenz, Pimlico Plumbers, Uber and Windle, the tribunal held that the reality of the relationship was a contract under which the claimant undertook to perform work personally and was a worker within Regulation 2(1)(b) of the Working Time Regulations 1998. It also held that, as a worker, he was entitled to annual leave under Regulation 13 and Regulation 16 of the Regulations.

On holiday entitlement, the tribunal found that the claimant had taken two days' holiday in the holiday year 10 March 2017 to 9 March 2018 and 11 days in the holiday year beginning 10 March 2018 to 20 May 2018. It said that beyond those periods it could not quantify the holiday pay claim on the evidence and submissions before it. It therefore did not make any monetary award.

The tribunal held that payment should have been made by 28 May 2018 and that the claim presented on 2 November 2018 was outside the three-month time limit in Regulation 30(2). It was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the complaint in time, and it refused to extend time. The tribunal therefore stated that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the holiday pay claim.