Claimant v WIND Financial Information UK Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant's contractual entitlement to basic pay from August 2022 was £5,500 gross per month. The respondent's purported variation via Sales Policy documents in 2022 and 2023 did not validly vary the contract because the claimant was not given time to read the documents, was not informed of the reduction in basic pay, and the documents were not signed by the respondent. Therefore, the shortfall in basic pay between August 2022 and April 2024 constituted unauthorised deductions.
The tribunal found that the claimant was contractually entitled to 7% employer pension contributions on her gross basic pay from August 2022. As the respondent failed to pay the full basic pay on a number of occasions, the pension contributions were also short. The tribunal awarded the shortfall in pension contributions on the underpaid basic pay.
Claim for failure to provide itemised pay statements was withdrawn by the claimant at the hearing.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a sales and account executive from 14 March 2022 with a written contract entitling her to £5,500 gross basic pay per month from August 2022 (after probation). The respondent purported to vary this contract via Sales Policy documents signed in 2022 and 2023, which provided for variable basic pay based on performance (£4,000-£5,500). The claimant was not given copies of these documents, was not allowed time to read them, and was not informed that her basic pay would be reduced. From August 2022 to April 2024, she was frequently paid less than £5,500 basic pay per month.
Decision
The tribunal found that the Sales Policy documents did not validly vary the claimant's contract because the respondent failed to draw her attention to the reduction in basic pay, the documents were not signed by the respondent, and the contract required written variations signed by both parties. The claimant was therefore entitled to £5,500 basic pay per month from August 2022 and to 7% employer pension contributions on that amount. The tribunal awarded £17,928.57 in arrears of pay and £1,255.00 in pension loss.
Practical note
A purported contractual variation must be clearly communicated and understood by the employee, particularly where it is detrimental; merely signing a policy document without opportunity to read or understand its effect will not be sufficient to vary a contract that expressly requires written variations signed by both parties.
Award breakdown
Award equivalent: 15.1 weeks' gross pay
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6003436/2024
- Decision date
- 19 February 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- financial services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Employment details
- Role
- Sales and account executive
- Salary band
- £60,000–£80,000
- Service
- 2 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor