Cases→4106578/2024

Claimant v Shakebar Limited

6 January 2025Before Employment Judge R SorrellScotlandremote video

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£315

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(sex)withdrawn

It was agreed at the Case Management Preliminary Hearing on 23 October 2024 that only the minimum wage complaint would proceed, meaning the sex discrimination claim was withdrawn or struck out.

Equal Pay(sex)withdrawn

It was agreed at the Case Management Preliminary Hearing on 23 October 2024 that only the minimum wage complaint would proceed, meaning the equal pay claim was withdrawn or struck out.

National Minimum Wagesucceeded

The tribunal found the claimants were workers under ERA 1996 and NMWA 1998, having worked 45 hours each at the Glastonbury Festival. They were entitled to £11.44 per hour minimum wage. The respondent's payment based on 'effort' rather than minimum wage rate was unlawful.

Facts

Two students worked at the Glastonbury Festival for five days making and selling refreshment drinks for the respondent company. They were told by a friend (Anna) they would work approximately 35 hours and be paid £500, based on previous years. The respondent paid them different amounts (£200 and £250 respectively) based on 'effort' rather than hours worked. The claimants worked 45 hours each under supervision of a respondent employee. The respondent argued they were contractors, not workers, and payment was calculated on effort, with the festival ticket forming part of payment.

Decision

The tribunal found the claimants were workers under ERA 1996 and NMWA 1998, having entered into an oral contract to work personally for the respondent who exercised considerable control over their work. The respondent was not a client or customer of the claimants who were students not running a business. The claimants were entitled to minimum wage of £11.44 per hour for 45 hours worked. The respondent's system of paying based on 'effort' was unlawful.

Practical note

Casual festival workers are entitled to minimum wage protection and cannot be paid on a discretionary 'effort' basis; worker status depends on the reality of the working relationship, not labels or intentions.

Award breakdown

Unpaid wages£315

Legal authorities cited

Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.230(3)National Minimum Wage Act 1998 s.54(3)

Case details

Case number
4106578/2024
Decision date
6 January 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
Shakebar Limited
Sector
hospitality
Represented
No

Employment details

Role
Refreshment drinks maker and server

Claimant representation

Represented
No
Search for this judgment on GOV.UK →