Part-Time Lecturer Awarded £30K After Being Treated Less Favourably Compared to Full-Time Employees

In Ms R King v Capital City College Group, a college lecturer has been awarded over £30,000, after the employment tribunal found she was denied additional remuneration despite completing duties outside her role. The tribunal held that a full-time comparator would’ve been given the additional payments, ruling she’d been treated less favourably. Below, we examine what happened and the judgment of the tribunal.

If you are being treated unfairly at work and believe your employment rights have been breached, contact us immediately. Redmans Solicitors are employment law specialists, and following a brief consultation, we can answer your queries and provide expert advice.

Begin your journey with us today by:

The Facts in Ms R King v Capital City College Group

Background to Claimant Being Treated Less Favourably

Ms R King (“the Claimant”) began working for Capital City College Group (“the Respondent”), formerly known as the College of North East London, in September 1989. She was an English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) lecturer until she was made redundant in 2016.

Following her redundancy, she undertook an early years teacher training course at University College London. She subsequently re-joined the Respondent as an hourly paid lecturer (HPL) on a zero-hours contract in the School of ESOL in September 2018.

Three years later, issues arose when the Claimant and her manager agreed she would develop two new ESOL courses for the Respondent. These included “learn to read and write” and “foundation to pre-entry.”

Unfortunately, despite this work being outside her original contract, which didn’t cover curriculum development, she claimed she didn’t receive appropriate additional remuneration. The Claimant was paid the equivalent of three hours’ pay for the time she spent developing these courses.

What’s more, she received no extra payments for the time she took to undertake additional duties between 2021 and 2022. These included, among other things, providing training sessions for colleagues or organising class trips. While the Respondent accepted during proceedings that these duties were outside her contracted role, it argued she’d undertaken them “voluntarily” due to her interest in phonics for adults.

Employment Tribunal Claims Brought

With no internal remedy in sight, the Claimant eventually turned to the employment tribunal. On 20 February 2023, she brought claims of less favourable treatment of part-time workers, direct age discrimination, and a breach of her particulars of employment. With regard to:

  • Direct Age Discrimination at Work: She argued that she was denied a salaried contract, which she could have been provided based on her work hours.
  • Less Favourable Treatment of Part-Time Workers: She contended she was treated less favourably than full-time workers, particularly in relation to pay for the extra duties she performed.
  • Breach of Her Particulars of Employment: She based this claim on her not being compensated for the extra duties she had undertaken.

The Employment Tribunal’s Judgment

Tribunal Rules Claimant was Treated Less Favourably

Following the proceedings, the employment tribunal first dealt with the Claimant’s direct age discrimination claim. It found serious HR failings, particularly a lack of communication with hourly-paid staff about salaried contract opportunities through fractional roles.

That said, the tribunal couldn’t find evidence that the Respondent denied the Claimant a salaried contract because of her age. Instead, it was determined that the Claimant didn’t satisfy the requirement of averaging 432 hours per year over a three-year period. As a result, the direct age discrimination in the workplace claim was dismissed.

The tribunal then considered the less favourable treatment of part-time workers claim. During proceedings, the Respondent argued that the Claimant’s additional work was done voluntarily because of her background and subject interests.

However, the tribunal rejected this argument and quickly threw it out. While the Claimant’s skills and interests may have aligned with the additional work, the tribunal stated this didn’t make the work voluntary in nature. Had a full-time worker been assigned similar duties, they would have been paid for them.

In the Claimant’s case, the tribunal believed a full-time comparator would have received payment for approximately six additional hours per week for non-teaching duties, which she did not. Because of this, it was determined she’d been treated less favourably as a part-time worker, with this claim being upheld.

Finally, the tribunal considered her claim for breach of employment particulars. Although it found technical failings, it ruled that no remedy was available under Section 38 of the Employment Act 2002.

Claimant Awarded Over £30k for Being Treated Unfairly at Work

While the Claimant was unsuccessful with her claims of direct age discrimination and breach of employment particulars, she won her less favourable treatment of part-time workers claim. Consequently, the employment tribunal awarded her £30,531.58 for the unfair treatment in the workplace. Her compensation comprised £23,117.64 of basic pay, £1,370 of sick pay, and £6,043.78 of pension contributions.

Following the ruling, the Respondent issued a statement. In a succinct manner, it said, “This matter is being considered through the appropriate legal process. We have no further comment to make.”

Have You Been Treated Less Favourably?

Under the Equality Act 2010, individuals are protected from unfair treatment in the workplace. This includes various forms of misconduct, such as discrimination, harassment, and victimisation. Even if an employer isn’t responsible for the mistreatment, they could be vicariously liable if they fail to act appropriately.

Internal procedures, including raising a formal grievance, can help resolve the matter. However, if this doesn’t work, steps such as ACAS early conciliation or raising a claim in the courts may need to be considered. Whatever the case, it’s wise to seek expert legal advice before proceeding, to ensure the appropriate steps are taken and the optimal outcome is reached.

If you’ve faced discrimination in the workplace or have any questions about your employment rights, please contact Redmans Solicitors now. As employment law experts, we can provide the answers you’re looking for and discuss your possible next steps. Should you have an eligible claim, we could also guide you through the legal process.

All you have to do to get started is: