The Court of Appeals has dismissed the appeal made by Pimlico Plumbers regarding the employment status of a former plumber. Gary Smith argued that he was entitled to workers’ rights after he suffered a heart attack and asked the company to reduce his working hours.
Although Pimlico Plumbers’ contractors are technically self-employed, the Court ruled that they were entitled to employment rights such as sick pay, minimum wage and paid holiday. Mr Smith was VAT-registered and paying tax on a self-employed basis, but worked solely for Pimlico Plumbers for six years. In 2010 he had a heart attack and wanted to reduce his hours from five days a week to three.
The company refused Mr Smith’s request and took away his hired branded van, effectively dismissing him. Mr Smith believed that he was entitled to working rights in these circumstances and took his case to an employment tribunal. The tribunal found that the plumbers were workers and not employees. The Court of Appeal agreed with that decision, leading to the dismissal of Pimlico Plumbers’ appeal.
The Court ruled that because Mr Smith worked a minimum of 40 hours a week, had to wear a company uniform, and drove Pimlico Plumbers’ vehicles, he was a worker. Those deemed to be workers qualify for more rights than if they were identified as self-employed and working on a freelance basis.
Commenting on the court case, Phil Pepper, employment partner at law firm Shakespeare Martineau, says: “The business model adopted by Pimlico Plumbers offers flexibility to both the employer and employee. However, employment practices cannot be left unregulated and rights of workers and employees cannot be ignored.”
A spokesperson from Eversheds Sutherland says: “A common confusion is to assume that workers treated as self-employed for tax purposes have no employment rights, such as paid holiday, pensions and the minimum wage. While that is true for those self-employed who genuinely run their own independent businesses, it is incorrect for a growing number of self-employed workers.
“These workers are typically subject to a greater degree of control by the business, are not allowed to send a replacement to do their work, and are integrated into the organisation. For example, they are presented to the outside world as part of the organisation, such as wearing a uniform, and they are told when, where and how to do their work. The law says that this is not a contract between two independent business undertakings and, as such, the worker is entitled to the enhanced protection of some, but not all, employment rights.”
Speaking outside the court, Charlie Mullins, boss of Pimlico Plumbers, said: “I am happy. This gives some clarity. We will be looking at the full judgment and there is a good chance we will appeal to the Supreme Court.”
