Cases4106538/2024

Claimant v Caledonia Highland Dress

20 December 2024Before Employment Judge I McFatridgeScotlandremote video

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesfailed

The claimant claimed failure to provide itemised pay slips from September 2023 onwards. The tribunal found that since no payments of wages or salary were made after September 2023 (except one SSP arrears payment made in full without deductions), there was no obligation under s8 Employment Rights Act 1996 to provide pay slips where no payment is being made.

Otherfailed

The claimant sought compensation for psychological damage and time spent chasing pay slips and communicating with HMRC and ACAS. The tribunal found there is no legal entitlement to compensation for stress in these circumstances and this claim was not well-founded.

Holiday Payfailed

The claimant sought payment in lieu of accrued holiday pay. The tribunal found that while the claimant accrued 25 days' leave in 2023 and continued to accrue leave whilst off sick, under the Working Time Regulations payment in lieu is only due when employment ends (regulation 14). As the claimant remained employed and had not taken the leave, she was not entitled to payment in lieu at that time.

Facts

The claimant worked for the respondent from June 2015 until going off on long-term sick leave in February 2023. She received statutory sick pay until September 2023, with pay slips provided during that period. HMRC identified an SSP underpayment of £190.89 which was paid in full without deductions around February 2024. The claimant sought itemised pay slips for periods after September 2023 when no payments were made, compensation for stress caused by chasing paperwork, and payment in lieu of accrued holiday pay. The claimant remained employed throughout and did not take any holiday during her sickness absence.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed all claims. The failure to provide pay slips claim failed because there is no obligation to provide itemised pay statements where no payment of wages is made. The claim for compensation for stress failed as there is no legal entitlement to such compensation. The holiday pay claim failed because under the Working Time Regulations, payment in lieu is only due when employment ends - the claimant remained employed and had accrued leave which she was entitled to carry forward and take in future.

Practical note

Employers are not obliged to provide itemised pay statements under s8 ERA 1996 when no wages are being paid, and employees on long-term sick leave who remain employed cannot claim payment in lieu of accrued holiday - they must either take the leave or receive payment when employment terminates.

Legal authorities cited

Stringer and others v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2009] ICR 932Schultz-Hoff v Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund [2009] ICR 932

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.8-12Working Time Regulations 1998 regulation 14Working Time Regulations 1998

Case details

Case number
4106538/2024
Decision date
20 December 2024
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
No
Rep type
lay rep

Employment details

Salary band
£15,000–£20,000

Claimant representation

Represented
No
Rep type
lay rep