LLB DL
Employee Status
- Situation where 2 parties have a mutuality of obligation – relationship
between the employer and the employee
- Extent of a redress/ remedy that an employee can get
- We must establish whether the party is an employee
- To establish an employee – degree of control & mutuality of obligation
Someone who is paid to do work could be -
1. Employee – contrasted with other categories of workers.
2. Worker
3. Independent Contractor (self-employed)
It is fundamental to employment law to identify who is an employee and
who is an independent contractor.
Some rights are now extended to a wider category of “worker” - For
example, EqA 2010, s. 83(2), refers to ‘employment under a contract of
employment, a contract of apprenticeship or a contract personally to do
work’ – but note many employment rights such as unfair dismissal and
redundancy still require employee status.
What is the significance of establishing employee
status in relation to each of the following?
• Employment Rights – e.g. Unfair Dismissal
Page 1 of 8
, • Vicarious Liability – where an employer is held liable for the wrongdoing
of an employee, or someone whose role is akin to that of an employee,
even where the employer has done no wrong itself
• Implied Terms in an Employment Contract – if there is nothing clearly
agreed between you and your employer about a particular issue. E.g,
not stealing from your employer
• PAYE – Pay As You Earn
• Welfare Benefits
How do we know if someone has employee status?
Does statute help us decide if someone is an employee?
• There is little help from statue in deciding whether or not someone
satisfies the definition of employee.
• See, for example, s230 ERA 96 which defines an employee as “…an
individual who has entered into or works under …..a contract of
employment.”
What about the Contract?
• There might not be a written contract.
• Even if there is as we shall see our courts might not go by “the label on
the tin.”
The Common Law Tests
• Control - Yewens v. Noakes (1880) 6 Q.B. 530 - Bramwell L.J., stated, “A
servant is a person subject to the command of his master as to the
Page 2 of 8
Employee Status
- Situation where 2 parties have a mutuality of obligation – relationship
between the employer and the employee
- Extent of a redress/ remedy that an employee can get
- We must establish whether the party is an employee
- To establish an employee – degree of control & mutuality of obligation
Someone who is paid to do work could be -
1. Employee – contrasted with other categories of workers.
2. Worker
3. Independent Contractor (self-employed)
It is fundamental to employment law to identify who is an employee and
who is an independent contractor.
Some rights are now extended to a wider category of “worker” - For
example, EqA 2010, s. 83(2), refers to ‘employment under a contract of
employment, a contract of apprenticeship or a contract personally to do
work’ – but note many employment rights such as unfair dismissal and
redundancy still require employee status.
What is the significance of establishing employee
status in relation to each of the following?
• Employment Rights – e.g. Unfair Dismissal
Page 1 of 8
, • Vicarious Liability – where an employer is held liable for the wrongdoing
of an employee, or someone whose role is akin to that of an employee,
even where the employer has done no wrong itself
• Implied Terms in an Employment Contract – if there is nothing clearly
agreed between you and your employer about a particular issue. E.g,
not stealing from your employer
• PAYE – Pay As You Earn
• Welfare Benefits
How do we know if someone has employee status?
Does statute help us decide if someone is an employee?
• There is little help from statue in deciding whether or not someone
satisfies the definition of employee.
• See, for example, s230 ERA 96 which defines an employee as “…an
individual who has entered into or works under …..a contract of
employment.”
What about the Contract?
• There might not be a written contract.
• Even if there is as we shall see our courts might not go by “the label on
the tin.”
The Common Law Tests
• Control - Yewens v. Noakes (1880) 6 Q.B. 530 - Bramwell L.J., stated, “A
servant is a person subject to the command of his master as to the
Page 2 of 8
