Professional Documents
Culture Documents
What is an employee?
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
1
Ferguson v John Dawson & Partners
1976
• The facts: A builder's labourer was paid his wages,
without deduction of income tax or National Insurance
contributions, and worked as a self-employed contractor
providing services. His 'employer' could dismiss him,
decide on which site he would work and direct him as to
the work he should do. It also provided the tools which he
used. He was injured in an accident and sued his
employers on the basis that they owed him legal duties as
his employer.
• Decision: On the facts taken as a whole, he was an
employee working under a contract of employment.
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
2
Mersey Docks & Harbour Board v
Coggins & Griffiths (Liverpool) 1947
• The facts: Stevedores (dockworkers) hired a crane with its driver from
the harbour board under a contract which provided that the driver
(appointed and paid by the harbour board) should be the employee of
the stevedores. Owing to the driver's negligence a checker was
injured. The case was concerned with whether the stevedores or the
harbour board were vicariously liable as employers.
• Decision: It was decided that the issue must be settled on the facts
and not on the terms of the contract. The stevedores could only be
treated as employers of the driver if they could control in detail how he
did his work. But although they could instruct him what to do, they
could not control him in how he operated the crane. The harbour
board (as 'general employer') was therefore still the driver's employer.
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
3
Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) v Ministry
of Pensions & National Insurance 1968
• The facts: The driver of a special vehicle worked for one company
only in the delivery of liquid concrete to building sites. He provided
his own vehicle (obtained on hire purchase from the company) and
was responsible for its maintenance and repair. He was free to
provide a substitute driver. The vehicle was painted in the
company's colours and the driver wore its uniform. He was paid
gross amounts (no tax, etc deducted) on the basis of mileage and
quantity delivered as a self-employed contractor. The Ministry of
Pensions claimed that he was, in fact, an employee for whom the
company should make the employer's insurance contributions.
• Decision: In such cases the most important test is whether the
worker is working on his own account. On these facts the driver
was a self-employed transport contractor and not an employee.
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Relevant factors
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
4
Why does it matter?
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
5
Methodist Conference v Preston 2013
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Implied terms
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
6
Requirement for written particulars
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
7
Employee's duties
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
8
The implied duties of the employee
(a) Reasonable competence to do their job.
(b) Obedience to the employer's instructions unless they require them
to do an unlawful act or to expose themselves to personal danger (not
inherent in their work) or are instructions outside the employee's
contract.
(c) Duty to account for all money and property received during the
course of their employment except what is customary to be received
or is trivial.
(d) Reasonable care and skill in the performance of their work. What is
reasonable depends on the degree of skill and experience which the
employee professes to have.
(e) Personal service – the contract of employment is a personal one
and so the employee may not delegate their duties without the
employer's express or implied consent.
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Employer's duties
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
9
Employer's duties
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Statutory duties
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
10
Varying the terms of an employment
contract
• A contract of employment can only be varied if the
contract expressly gives that right, or if all parties
consent to the variation.
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Termination by notice
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
11
Minimum period of notice
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
12
Summary dismissal
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Constructive dismissal
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
13
Wrongful dismissal
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Unfair dismissal
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
14
Unfair dismissal – justification of
dismissal
To justify dismissal as fair dismissal, employers must show their
principal reason relates to either:
(a) The capability or qualifications of the employee for
performing work of the kind which they were employed to do
(b) The conduct of the employee
(c) Redundancy
(d) Legal prohibition or restriction that prevents the employee
from lawfully working in the position which they held. For
example, if a doctor is struck off the relevant professional register,
or an employee loses their driving licence which they need to be
able to do their job
(e) Some other substantial reason which justifies dismissal
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
15
Remedies for unfair dismissal
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Compensation
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
16
Compensation
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
Compensation
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
17
Redundancy
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
What is redundancy?
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
18
British Broadcasting Corporation v
Farnworth 1998
• In British Broadcasting Corporation v Farnworth 1998 a
radio producer's fixed-term contract was not renewed and
the employer advertised for a radio producer with more
experience. It was held by the Employment Appeal
Tribunal (EAT) that the less-experienced radio producer
was indeed redundant as the requirement for her level
of services had diminished.
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
www.vietsourcing.com www.vietsourcing.edu.vn
19