1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 
Tribunal rulings
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
• Differing decisions as to whether drivers who pay their own income tax and National Insurance can be regarded as "self employed" have been reached by two Hereford Industrial Tribunals in separate cases.
In the first case, a tribunal held that Brian Preston was an "employee" of C W Griffiths & Sons when awarding him £3,315 compensation for unfair dismissal.
In deciding that Preston was an employee in the three years between April 1985 and April 1988 — despite the fact that both he and the company had regarded him as self-employed — the tribunal took account of the fact that he was driving the company's lorry, not his own, and that he did no other work.
The tribunal said he was as
6 6
much under the company's control as any of Griffiths' other drivers. He had no independent field of operations and was fully integrated into the company's business.
In the second case, a tribunal decided that Joseph Sallis was not an "employee" of Curlliffe & Lively.
When Sallis applied for a job with the firm, in August 1988, he was told that the wages would be £4.10 an hour on a self-employed basis. All the firm's drivers were selfemployed and were paid more as a result.
Sallis argued that when he began working for the firm he was guaranteed 45 hours a week_ He had been told the work would be permanent. He claimed that made it full-time "employment" in the ordinary sense of the word.