Key Facts
- •Gillian Philip, a writer, entered into contracts with Working Partners Limited (a book packager) to provide text for children's books published by HarperCollins Publishers LLC.
- •Philip's contract was terminated after she tweeted in support of an author expressing views on gender/biological sex issues.
- •Philip claimed discrimination, but the Employment Judge dismissed the claim, finding she was neither an 'employee' under the Equality Act 2010 nor a 'worker' under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
- •The appeal focused on whether the Employment Judge correctly applied the legal test for 'worker' status under section 230(3)(b), ERA 1996.
Legal Principles
The test for determining employment status under section 83(2)(a), Equality Act 2010 is the same as that for determining worker status under section 230(3)(b), Employment Rights Act 1996.
Pimlico Plumbers Ltd v. Smith [2018] UKSC 29
Section 230(3)(b), ERA 1996 defines a worker as an individual who undertakes to do or perform personally any work or services for another party, whose status is not that of a client or customer of any profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual.
Employment Rights Act 1996, section 230(3)(b)
There is no magic test for worker status other than applying the words of the statute to the facts of the individual case. Concepts like subordination, integration, and control are tools, not tests themselves.
Bates van Winkelhof v. Clyde & Co LLP [2014] UKSC 32; Uber BV v. Aslam [2021] UKSC 5; Sejpal v. Rodericks Dental Ltd [2022] EAT 91
To be a limb (b) worker, there must be (1) a contract for work or services; (2) personal service; and (3) the other party is not a client or customer of the individual's business.
Uber BV v. Aslam [2021] UKSC 5
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Employment Judge correctly identified and applied the appropriate legal test, considered all relevant factors, and reached a conclusion open to him on the evidence. The appellant's criticisms amounted to disagreements on the weight of evidence and conclusions drawn, not errors of law.