Updated
Updated · Freeths · Aug 20
UK Supreme Court Broadens Part-Time Bias Claims in £148 Fee Case
Updated
Updated · Freeths · Aug 20

UK Supreme Court Broadens Part-Time Bias Claims in £148 Fee Case

3 articles · Updated · Freeths · Aug 20

Summary

  • Part-time status can ground an unlawful less-favourable-treatment claim even when it is only one effective cause, the Supreme Court ruled in Augustine v Data Cars.
  • The case centered on a private-hire driver charged a flat £148 weekly circuit fee; he argued a pro-rata fee should apply because the fixed charge hit part-time workers harder.
  • An employment tribunal had found he was treated less favourably than full-time drivers but rejected the claim because the fee reflected industry practice rather than solely his part-time status.
  • The Supreme Court said the law’s phrase “on the ground that” does not require part-time status to be the sole cause, shifting employers toward objective-justification defenses or arguments that part-time status was not an effective cause.

Insights

Could a seemingly neutral industry standard at your workplace actually be illegal discrimination against part-time employees?
Will the Supreme Court's rejection of the sole-cause loophole trigger a massive wave of gig economy compensation claims?