A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision is a useful reminder that part-time worker protections can apply more broadly than employers may expect, particularly where individuals work under non-traditional or flexible arrangements.
The case highlights the importance of looking beyond job titles or contractual labels when assessing worker status and entitlement to equal treatment.
The Case
In Advocate General for Scotland v Milroy, the claimant was an Army Reservist who argued that he had been treated less favourably than comparable full-time personnel.
His complaints included:
- parts of his service being excluded for pension purposes; and
- his daily pay rate not being equivalent, on a pro rata basis, to that of full-time comparators.
The Employment Tribunal upheld his claims under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 (“PTWR”), and the decision was later upheld by the EAT.
What Did the EAT Decide?
The EAT agreed that the claimant qualified as a “worker” for the purposes of the legislation, despite the unusual nature of the working relationship.
It also upheld the Tribunal’s findings that:
- the claimant’s pay arrangements were less favourable than those of comparable full-time workers; and
- the differences in treatment were directly linked to his part-time status.
The decision reinforces the fact that Tribunals will often take a practical approach when assessing employment status and workplace protections.
Why This Matters for Employers
While the case involved an Army Reservist, the principles are relevant across a wide range of workplaces and sectors.
Many organisations engage individuals under flexible, casual, consultant, zero-hours or other non-standard arrangements. This decision is a reminder that employers should not assume such individuals fall outside employment protections simply because the relationship is atypical.
The case also highlights the importance of ensuring that part-time workers are not treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers unless there is a legitimate and objectively justifiable reason for the difference.
Potential areas of risk can include:
- rates of pay;
- bonus entitlement;
- pension arrangements;
- benefits eligibility;
- training opportunities; and
- career progression.
Even longstanding or historic arrangements may still give rise to legal risk if they disproportionately disadvantage part-time workers.
Reviewing Existing Arrangements
Employers may wish to review their current arrangements for part-time and non-standard workers to ensure that policies and practices remain fair, consistent and legally compliant.
Worker status assessments are highly fact-specific and Tribunals will often look at the practical reality of the relationship rather than the wording of contractual documentation alone.
How We Can Help
Understanding worker status and part-time worker protections can be complex, particularly where organisations operate flexible or non-traditional working arrangements.
Our experienced HR Consultants can support employers with:
- reviewing worker and employment status;
- assessing part-time worker arrangements;
- auditing pay and benefits structures; and
- identifying discrimination and equal treatment risks.
If you would like advice on reviewing your current arrangements or support with part-time worker issues, please get in touch with one of our experienced HR Consultants.
To find out more or to speak with one of our specialists – email info@quenshspecialists.co.uk or call us on 01358 788094.
