In Augustine v Data Cars Ltd, the Supreme Court ruled that part-time workers need only show that their ‘part-timer’ status is an “effective cause” of any less favourable treatment they are complaining of, rather than the “sole cause.” This contrasts with previous rulings, including those made before this case reached the Supreme Court, which stated that employment status had to be the sole cause of less favourable treatment for a claim to succeed.

Read on as we examine what happened, including the background to the case and the Supreme Court’s judgment. We analyse the judgments leading to the final verdict, including those from the initial Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal. We then highlight key insights from the case.

If you have any questions or concerns relating to part-time workers and their employment rights, contact Redmans Solicitors. As sector specialists, we can assess your circumstances, answer your queries and provide expert advice. For those eligible, we can also guide you through each stage of any relevant legal process.

To begin and find out more about how we could help you, please:

• Give us a call directly on 020 3397 3603
• Complete our online form with your details to request a callback

Does Employment Status Need to be the Sole Reason Part-Time Workers Suffer Detriment?

Background to the Employment Status Claim

Mr Augustine worked as a part-time driver for Data Cars Ltd. Central to his complaint was the fact that all drivers, irrespective of whether they were full-time or part-time workers, had to pay a £148 per week “circuit fee.” Mr Augustine claimed this amounted to less favourable treatment, as he was effectively paying more per hour worked, and argued that a “pro rata approach” would have been fairer.

Read More: Russian Speaking HMRC Trainee Wins Race Discrimination at Work Claim

However, Mr Augustine’s claim was initially dismissed. The Employment Tribunal (ET) did agree that he’d been treated less favourably because of his employment status. It held that this wasn’t the sole reason for how the fee was implemented, though. According to the ET, charging the fee universally was “standard practice in the industry.” It therefore ruled that Mr Augustine’s rights under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 (PTW Regulations) hadn’t been breached.

Case Gets Sent to the Supreme Court

When the case reached the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), it held that the ET had erred in its decision. This was because the ET required employment status to be the sole reason part-time workers face detriment under the PTW Regulations. However, the EAT ruled that part-time status need only be “an effective and predominant cause” of the treatment suffered. Despite this, since an earlier ruling in McMenemy v Capita Business Services Ltd established that employment status must be the sole reason for a worker being treated less favourably, the EAT felt “bound to follow” this “narrower interpretation,” and so dismissed the appeal.

Mr Augustine subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal (CA), but this, too, was ultimately unsuccessful. Although a majority believed the judgment in McMenemy was “wrongly decided,” like the EAT, it felt compelled to follow it. In the CA’s view, the Supreme Court had to resolve the matter and set precedent for future cases.

Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Part-Time Workers

When the case eventually reached the Supreme Court, it allowed Mr Augustine’s appeal. It stated that the PTW Regulations protected part-time workers against less favourable treatment due to their employment status. It added that this status need only be an “effective cause” of the treatment in question, not the sole cause.

What Does the Supreme Court Ruling Mean?

The Supreme Court ruling in Augustine v Data Cars Ltd makes it clear that when part-time workers experience less favourable treatment, their ‘part-timer’ status need not be the sole cause. This distinction matters because it means employers cannot hide behind blanket procedures when other factors may contribute to the decision.

Previously, employers may have argued that “industry standard practice” drove a decision that led to a part-time worker suffering detriment. However, now that the Supreme Court has established that employment status need only be an “effective cause” for being treated less favourably, employers must be more careful not to breach the PTW Regulations.

Read More: Beauty Therapist Awarded Over £30K After Wrongful Dismissal

From an employee’s perspective, this is good news. The threshold for one’s rights being breached under the PTW Regulations appears to have been lowered. This means it will likely be easier for part-time workers to prove they’ve faced less favourable treatment because of their employment status. Even if other factors are at play, if said status was a significant enough contributing factor, those affected will therefore have a greater chance of succeeding with legal action.

What Can I do if My Employment Rights Have Been Breached?

If part-time workers believe they’ve suffered a detriment because of their employment status, they have several options for seeking a resolution. Before choosing which route to take, though, it’s recommended to gather evidence of the act(s) complained of. While not all cases proceed to an Employment Tribunal, having evidence strengthens any potential future claim.

Once evidence has been gathered, it’s then typically advised to consider internal dispute resolution avenues. Depending on the circumstances and the severity of the issue at hand, this could include having an informal chat with one’s manager or raising a formal grievance. Both options offer a chance to resolve the matter before legal action becomes necessary, but the latter places additional legal obligations on the employer.

However, where internal avenues fail to resolve the situation, external measures may be required. Before Employment Tribunal claims can be brought, this usually means notifying Acas and beginning early conciliation with them. This free and independent process provides another chance to find a resolution without the need for costly legal action.

If all else fails, though, individuals can pursue Employment Tribunal proceedings. To proceed, claimants must meet strict eligibility criteria and time limits, but if successful, the Tribunal may award compensation.

In any case, it’s recommended to obtain specialist legal advice before acting. Doing so ensures the legal position is fully understood and the best course of action is taken.

Part-Time Workers: Get Help with Redmans

Part-time workers looking to protect their employment rights should consider specialist legal help. Contact Redmans Solicitors today if you would like expert advice regarding your employment matter. Following a brief chat, we can assess your case, answer your questions and discuss your possible next steps.

Begin your journey with us now by:

• Phoning 020 3397 3603
• Requesting a callback via our online form