Claimant v Lidl Great Britain Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claim was based on a misunderstanding of how the claimant was paid for annual leave. The claimant received full basic pay throughout the year, which included pay for days taken as annual leave. The claimant was paid for all 11 days of holiday taken up to 31 March 2024 at the appropriate rate. No unauthorised deductions were made from wages.
The tribunal found the claimant was paid in respect of each day's holiday taken in the period up to 31 March 2024 at the appropriate rate. Holiday pay was included in the claimant's standard pay throughout the year. The claimant believed he was entitled to basic pay plus additional holiday pay on top, but this was incorrect. He received what was properly payable to him.
Facts
The claimant was employed as a Warehouse Operative from 21 November 2023 to 2 September 2024, initially full-time then part-time from 1 April 2024. He claimed he had not been paid for 11 days of holiday taken, particularly focusing on 2 days in March 2024. The respondent's payment system included holiday pay within standard monthly pay, meaning employees received the same pay whether working or on annual leave. The claimant had taken 11 days of accrued holiday entitlement by 31 March 2024.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claim, finding it was based on a misunderstanding of how holiday pay was calculated and paid. The claimant received full basic pay throughout his employment, which included payment for days taken as annual leave. There was no separate line item for holiday pay on payslips because holiday pay was rolled into standard monthly pay. The claimant was fully paid for all holiday taken.
Practical note
Employers who include holiday pay in standard monthly salaries rather than paying it separately when leave is taken must clearly communicate this to employees to avoid misunderstandings that can lead to tribunal claims.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8001068/2024
- Decision date
- 13 February 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Warehouse Operative
- Service
- 9 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No