Blog
From garage to unicorn – Employment law lessons for scaling tech teams
Catherine Bourne
UK equality laws, democracy and our largely tolerant multi-cultural society are precious and it is time we stopped paying attention to headlines and focused a bit more on legal accuracy. Without a clear understanding of where we are, it is impossible to make rational decisions on how to move forward at home and at work.
Last month we blogged on two recent cases which collated practical guidance from the courts on subject access requests (“SARs”) and foreshadowed another Court of Appeal decision on the same topic.
Newcastle upon Tyne NHS Foundation Trust v Sandi Hayward. Surprisingly this case was a most enjoyable read. In many ways it was a journey back to yester-year when there were so many decisions that turned on when letters may or may not have been delivered or received, with significant consequences turning upon the results. By and large there are far fewer decisions in this respect since the advent, and almost universal usage, of email.
It can be advantageous for businesses to engage people on a self-employed basis, but to control them in a way which may make it appear to the outside world that they are employees. The recent case involving Pimlico Plumbers Limited (“PP”) should be on the radar of any such organisation. Although there has of late been a string of cases on the currently hot topic of employment status, this latest case focuses predominantly on the right of substitution, and to what extent you can fetter that right, whilst still maintaining the desired “self-employed” status. Although the guidance is not definitive, it is still useful for any organisation currently using or considering such a set up. Furthermore, as a Court of Appeal case, it will be binding on all subsequent Tribunal cases.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility