The Pimlico Saga - Holiday Pay or not to Holiday Pay?

Pimlico Plumbers and Charlie Mullins v Gary Smith

An employment tribunal has found in favour of plumbing and service maintenance organisation Pimlico Plumbers (Pimlico) in an ongoing employment status case, dismissing the holiday pay claim lodged by former Pimlico worker Gary Smith.

Background:

• Mr Smith worked for Pimlico between August 2005 and April 2011 as a plumbing and heating engineer;
• Mr Smith’s contract with Pimlico was terminated on 3 May 2011.
•  In February 2017, a Tribunal found decided that Smith had not been an employee and, therefore, could not claim unfair dismissal, but that he could be classed as a worker under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Working Time Regulations 1998, and had been in employment for the purposes of the   Equality Act 2010.
•  In August 2017, Pimlico and its chief executive officer, Charlie Mullins, appealed this decision in the Court of Appeal, and when unsuccessful, appealed again to the Supreme Court.
• The Supreme Court judgment was handed down on 13 June 2018 and confirmed that Smith is classed as a worker, as per the decision of the employment tribunal.
• Mr Smith’s claim related to unpaid holiday pay, unlawful deductions from wages and disability discrimination and was raised shortly after his contract was terminated in May 2011;
• Mr Smith argued that he was owed £74,000 as a result of unpaid statutory annual leave.
• Pimlico agreed to pay £336 owed for unlawful deductions.

In Summary:

• The Tribunal found that Mr Smith’s last holiday leave was on 4 January 2011, which was over the Christmas period. Mr Smith had a heart attack on 5 January 2011 and was hospitalised. Due to the three-month tribunal time limit for lodging claims, Mr Smith’s claim had to be lodged no later than 3 April 2011 and he could claim only the last two weeks of unpaid leave.
• Mr Smith brought this tribunal claim in 2011, when the law operated differently and did not impose the three-month requirement between each leave period.
• Mr Smith lost this case as he had failed to meet the three-month time limit for bringing a claim

Jacqueline McGuigan, of TMP Solicitors, who acted for Mr Smith confirmed he will appeal.

Pimlico have advised they are considering reclaiming tribunal costs from Smith and suing for reputational damages.

Aspire Comment;

An interesting update for the Gig Economy which sets a precedent for future cases such as this in relation to holiday pay claims.    If you would like to us arrange an audit of your documentation to minimise the risk of potential Tribunal claims, do get in touch.

We will keep you informed of any further updates on Gig Economy cases.