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.

Dismissal for Misconduct Without a Reasonable Investigation is Rarely Fair

Dismissing an employee for misconduct is very unlikely to be viewed as fair if there has been no proper investigation and no consideration of either mitigation or the possibility of a lesser sanction. An Employment Tribunal (ET) made that point in the case of a veteran music teacher who was sacked for refusing to attend a staff meeting. The teacher, who had worked at the relevant school for 24 years, was told by her boss that attendance at the meeting was not optional. When she informed him…

Cooling Off Periods and Retraction of Oral Resignations – Guideline Ruling

Large employers often have ‘cooling off’ policies in place which address the common situation of employees orally announcing their resignation in a stressful moment and subsequently having second thoughts. As an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling showed, however, such polices, once adopted, must be honoured. The case concerned a supermarket worker who was under strain at home due to her onerous caring responsibilities for sick and elderly relatives. During an understaffed night shift, she became…

Houses in Multiple Occupation – A Cautionary Tale for Errant Landlords

Pressure on the housing market has led to the conversion of many redundant office buildings into flats and the number of such projects is likely to be greatly increased by shifting work patterns brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. A Court of Appeal ruling, however, powerfully signalled that rules in respect of health, safety and living standards at such premises will be rigorously enforced. The case concerned an office block that had been converted into 47 flats. After a housing officer…