The Workplace Of A Worker Is Not A Matter Of Choice

2376 Words10 Pages
Airfix Footwear v cope [1978] ICR 1210
Cole & Fred Stacey Ltd [1974] IRLR 73
Hall and Lorimer [1992] EWCA Civ 25
O’kelly and Others v Trusthouse Forte plc [1983] ICR 728
Ready Mixed Concrete and Minister of Pensions & National Insurance [1968] 2 QB 497
Nethermere v Gardiner [1984] IRLR 240
Walker and Crystal Palace FC [1910] 1K.B. 87
Warner Holidays Ltd and Secretary of State [1983] ICR 440
Yewins and Noakes [1880] LR 6 QB 530

Employment Rights Act 1996 s 230(1)

In order to determine the answer to the question, it should first be considered the nature of contract that is whether the waiters at Posh hotel are employees or self employed. an employment status of a worker is not a matter of choice, it
…show more content…
There are several tests and considerations to be examined beginning with the contract itself as to whether there is a valid employment contract.
One can then apply the remaining tests: Control Test - this is a 5 Tier test (who, what, where, when and how the work is done). The Economic Reality Test - this is a 3 tier test (consideration, control and consistency within the contract). Further development of these tests in case law consider personal service, degree of control, provision of own equipment, rights of substitution, financial gain or loss, investment and management and bonuses for good work. This is a 7 tier test. Lastly, the matter of tax and National Insurance will be addressed and considered for the purpose of statutory provisions.
Once all the tests have been applied and considered one must sit back and view the entire picture as these are not simple checklists to determine employment status as each are given different weighted consideration. The court will look at all the relevant facts together to make its decision as seen in Warner Holidays Ltd and Secretary of State [1983] the need to consider balancing the features of the relationship pointing to or detracting from employee status can be seen in Hall and Lorimer [1992]
For the purpose of this case it is to be determined if the waiters are an employee and has been unfairly dismissed, or if they are self-employed person as Posh hotel contends and having not been unfairly dismissed.
Get Access