Brexit Cost Live-in Domestic Workers the Right to the National Minimum Wage

The UK’s departure from the EU has had profound effects on aspects of employment law. As an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruling made plain, one of them was to remove the legal entitlement of nannies, housekeepers and other live-in domestic workers to receive the National Minimum Wage…

Apr 28, 2023

Pexels andrea piacquadio 755049 1024x683

The UK’s departure from the EU has had profound effects on aspects of employment law. As an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruling made plain, one of them was to remove the legal entitlement of nannies, housekeepers and other live-in domestic workers to receive the National Minimum Wage (NMW).

One such worker who was engaged to work in a couple’s home succeeded in an Employment Tribunal (ET) claim that she was entitled to be paid the NMW. That was on the basis that the vast majority of live-in domestic workers are women and the failure to pay her the NMW thus amounted to indirect sex discrimination. The ET reached its decision during the transition period that preceded the UK’s final exit from the EU.

The National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999 and 2015 exclude domestic workers engaged in family homes from the right to receive the NMW. The ET disapplied that exclusion, however, on the basis that it was indirectly discriminatory and conflicted with Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which enshrines the right of men and women to be paid equally.

In rejecting the couple’s challenge to that ruling, the EAT saw no reason to disagree with the ET’s conclusion. However, it noted that, since Brexit took full effect on 31 December 2020, tribunals have had no power to disapply domestic legislation on the ground that it is incompatible with directly effective EU law rights. The dismissal of the appeal, therefore, did not mean that a domestic worker in the same position would now be entitled to the NMW.

Providing Your Services Via a Company May Not Always Be a Good Idea

There can be advantages, both in terms of flexibility and tax efficiency, in providing your services via a private company. However, as an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling showed, such arrangements may also have the less desirable effect of stripping you of any employment rights you might otherwise have had. A nurse who worked part time at a care home launched ET proceedings against its owner, alleging unfair constructive dismissal and that she had been subjected to racial discrimination and…

Redundancy Selection – Subjective Performance Assessment is Not Enough

Conducting a fair redundancy process requires a careful, almost forensic approach and it is almost never good enough for employers to rely on a subjective assessment of an employee’s past performance. An Employment Tribunal (ET) succinctly made that point in upholding an IT engineer’s unfair dismissal claim. A small company needed to make cost savings due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and decided that one of its two IT engineers should be made redundant. A selection process was…

Furlough Whistleblower Succeeds in Automatic Unfair Dismissal Claim

Employees are entitled to insist that their employers abide by their legal obligations and should never be penalised for doing so. The point was made by the case of a woman who pointed out that a meeting with her boss had extended beyond her agreed working hours under the COVID-19 furlough scheme. The sales manager was on part-time flexible furlough during the pandemic and, on most days, her agreed working hours were between 10am and 4pm. During a performance review meeting with her boss, she…