Cases8001971/2024

Claimant v WBC Media CIC

29 July 2025Before Employment Judge J M HendryScotlandremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalstruck out

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. The claimant accepted he was not an employee, and unfair dismissal claims require employee status. The tribunal found the claimant had worker status under ERA s.230(3)(b), which is insufficient for unfair dismissal.

Direct Discrimination(sex)not determined

The preliminary hearing determined worker status only. The tribunal found the claimant was a worker under the Equality Act 2010, giving the tribunal jurisdiction to hear the sex discrimination claim. The case was listed for a final hearing to determine the substantive claim.

Whistleblowingnot determined

The preliminary hearing determined worker status only. The tribunal found the claimant was a worker under the extended definition in ERA s.230(3) relating to whistleblowing cases, giving the tribunal jurisdiction. The substantive whistleblowing detriment claim was listed for final hearing.

Facts

The claimant, an experienced local radio professional, was engaged by the respondent radio station start-up in May 2024 as a self-employed contractor to provide specialist services including making advertisements, programme setup, and filling in for presenters. He worked flexibly up to 20 hours per week at £50 per day, invoicing in his own name. Relations soured by August 2024 when the respondent sought to alter the arrangement requiring pre-approval of work. The claimant claimed he was sexually discriminated against and suffered whistleblowing detriment.

Decision

The tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine employment status after the respondent contested jurisdiction. The tribunal found the claimant was a worker under ERA s.230(3)(b) and the Equality Act 2010, as he was engaged for his personal expertise in radio and could not substitute, despite being self-employed for tax purposes. The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed as it requires employee status, but the sex discrimination and whistleblowing claims were listed for final hearing.

Practical note

Worker status turns on whether personal services are provided as part of another's business rather than to clients of one's own business, even where the individual is genuinely self-employed for tax purposes and works flexibly.

Legal authorities cited

Bates Van Winkelhoff v Clyde & Co LLP [2014] ICR 730Hospital Medical Group Ltd v Westwood [2013] ICR 415

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.83ERA 1996 s.230(3)

Case details

Case number
8001971/2024
Decision date
29 July 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
media
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Programme Director
Service
3 months

Claimant representation

Represented
No