AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Tribunal rules on Coates six

8th February 1990
Page 16
Page 16, 8th February 1990 — Tribunal rules on Coates six
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• Six drivers who had worked for Coates on a self-employed basis have been held to be "employees" by a Leicester industrial tribunal, and therefore entitled to claim redundancy payments.

The tribunal heard that until recently the haulage company had its own fleet, but now hired sub-contractors.

In 1981 the company's drivers agreed to become "selfemployed", responsible for their own tax and national insurance. The inland revenue accepted that they were selfemployed for tax purposes. The drivers were paid an agreed rate.

The tribunal said it was a "master and servant" relationship. The drivers' position was the same as it would have been for "employee" drivers doing the same work.

The only matters that might be found to be inconsistent with employee status were the payments of tax and national insurance; the absence of set holidays or holiday pay, and the absence of sick pay.

The tribunal said the mere fact that the parties agreed that the drivers should be treated as "self-employed" could not rule out a proper examination of their contracts to determine the exact relationship.