Call Us
08000 224 224
Consultation rights prove their virility
Where the buck stops
Worker or drone
Human rights are here
Using the Human Rights Act
Blowing the whistle on elderly care
Perceval-Price and others v Department of Economic Development and others [2000] IRLR 380 Northern Ireland Court of Appeal
In this case the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal decided that the term "worker" in the context of European Community law must be broadly and purposively interpreted. This finding allowed the applicants who were all Tribunal Chairmen to bring claims under equal pay and sex discrimination legislation.
Although few of our readers are Tribunal Chairmen who will directly benefit, the judgment is of wider use in the context of public service where many trade union members are in fact "office holders" rather than employees. The judgment may also have the effect of extending protection to workers (in the UK law sense) of other European measures - such as parental leave and pregnancy and maternity rights.
The applicants brought claims that they had been deprived of equality with men in respect of their pension rights. Their claims were opposed on the basis that they were "office holders" and that therefore an Employment Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear their claims.
However, both the Employment Tribunal and the Court of Appeal took a more purposive approach to the legislation. Equal pay legislation defines being "employed" as meaning "employed under a contract of service or of apprenticeship or a contract personally to execute any work or labour".
To come within the provisions of Community law in particular Article 119 the applicants had to establish that they were "workers" who were in "employment". The European Court of Justice has declared that the word "worker" has a Community meaning in the context of Article 39 (Free movement of workers) and that the criterion for the application of Article 39 is the existence of an employment relationship, regardless of the legal nature of that relationship or purpose. In the case of Lawrie - Blum v Land Baden - Wuerttenberg [1986] ECR 2121 the ECJ said "The essential feature of an employment relationship, however, is that for a certain period of time a person performs services for and under the direction of another person in return for which he receives remuneration".
Applying this definition to the work of Tribunal Chairmen the Court of Appeal held that the applicants came within the terms of Article 119 and the Directives as workers in employment. The Government consultation paper on extending employment rights to workers is due out shortly. In the meantime, this case will help to extend employment to protection with a European underpin to workers as well as employees.