An employment dispute can get complicated in the best of circumstances, and even more so when the question ‘are you even an employee?’ arises.
The recent Supreme Court case of Pimlico Plumbers has highlighted the continual issues surrounding the ever expanding gig economy. The gig economy focuses on the flexible use of labour – people working on an ‘as and when’ basis – and can be extremely beneficial for both the employer and the worker if used correctly, particularly in areas like Cornwall where work can be seasonal. Issues arise where the gig economy is falsely used to exploit vulnerable workers and where ‘sham’ contracts are carefully formulated to give the impression of self-employment, therefore removing the employer’s liability to provide certain benefits.
Such ‘sham’ contracts are inherently unfair – the worker loses the benefits of being employed and yet is, for all intents and purposes, still under the control of the employer.
This was the argument put forward by Mr Smith in Pimlico Plumbers. Mr Smith signed two agreements with Pimlico, both of a highly confusing nature, which bound him with heavy obligations – such as a 40 hour working week and the wearing of a uniform – and yet provided no contractual benefits, such as holiday pay or sick pay.
Pimlico is one of a number of recent cases surrounding the gig economy, including the prominent case of Uber. As the frequency of such cases rises, it is obvious that something further in the law is required in order to protect vulnerable workers, without destroying the very nature of the gig economy. It will certainly be a difficult task to balance.
If you are affected by the topic discussed, please contact Lee Middleton to see if any assistance can be provided.