Mr Smith 3 - Pimlico Plumbers 0
Worker status meant protection such as minimum wage, holiday pay and protection from discrimination!
Gary Smith who had worked for the firm Pimlico plumbers exclusively for 6 years under what the company alleged was a self employed relationship has won his legal battle against the company in a Supreme Court Judgment which has recently been handed down for worker status. The ruling is set to have a significant impact and ramifications for freelance workers everywhere.
Gary Smith was both VAT registered and paying self employed income tax for the full 6 years he worked for Pimlico yet the court decided that he was entitled to the rights of a worker. The Supreme Court found the Court of Appeal was entitled to rule as it had and upheld the judgement in an iconic landmark case.
The Supreme Court found against the argument submitted by Pimlico that Mr Smith could have sent a substitute to carry out his work if he so wished. The Supreme Court found that “The dominant feature of Mr Smith’s contract was that he must do the work himself.”
The company exercised “tight administrative control” over Mr Smith and he “undertook to do the work personally”, the Supreme Court said. Pimlico Plumbers further required Mr Smith to wear a uniform which was branded with the company logo and to lease one of its vans, which also displayed the company's logo and was equipped with a GPS tracker. Mr Smith also had to work a minimum number of hours per week.
The independent reported that “The decision has the potential to impact the rights of many people classified as independent contractors across the UK, including those at gig economy firms such as Uber and Deliveroo.”
However, employment lawyers have stated that they do not feel that this judgment is set to change anything dramatically for employment law cases. Alan Lewis, employment partner at law firm Irwin Mitchell in particularly stated that the decision was not a "game changer" and that cases would continue to be argued on their specific facts and, for businesses that rely on self-employed contracts, that means further uncertainty. He further added that "this decision is not necessarily a win for 'gig economy' workers seeking to challenge their employment status."
Tim Goodwin of law firm Winckworth Sherwood said that this ruling may not even be applicable to other employment cases. He went further and stated "Even with a high-level decision like this, to a degree the issue of employment status in the gig economy is up in the air.” "The government is consulting on this issue and may bring forward legislation. So, it's quite possible that Parliament may overrule this decision within the next few months or years."
As reported in the Independent Susannah Kintish, an employment partner at Mishcon de Reya who has led the case for Pimlico since 2011, said it was disappointing the Supreme Court had not laid down any clarifications for employers about how to classify workers. “Instead, all eyes will be on the government as businesses await legislation on how to categorise their workforce – something which could still be a matter of years away,” Ms Kintish said.
So, despite the much-awaited judgment it would appear that employment professionals are sceptical to the precedent which most think case may have set and are unconvinced that this case has changed anything in the law for others other than Mr Smith himself.
The Chief Executive of Pimlico, Charlie Mullins, told reporters that he was “disgusted by the approach taken to this case by the highest court in the United Kingdom.” “For those who think this is a victory for poorly paid workers everywhere, against large corporations who exploit their lack of bargaining power, think again. “In fact, this was exploitation – but instead by a highly paid, highly skilled man who used a loophole in current employment law to set himself up for a double payday.”
Is this the end we will hear of the gig-economy? Will legislature over rule the Supreme Court? Who knows but this is certainly something to keep an eye on!
