A fitter working for bedroom retailer Sharps is preparing to take it to an employment tribunal as he claims he should be considered a ‘worker’ rather than self-employed.
If he is successful, the case could allow gig economy workers fitting furniture for big chains to bring similar claims for rights including holiday pay, protections against discrimination and the national minimum wage.
David Lockwood has worked for Sharps for 30 years, installing fitted furniture including wardrobes and cupboards.
Although Sharps has classified him as self-employed, he claims that his employment arrangement is more akin to worker status as Sharps says he cannot carry out work for competitors and controls the dates, times and fees for his work.
Sharps worker status case
Supreme Court: Deliveroo riders are not ‘workers’
What the latest Uber case could mean for gig workers’ pay
Ministers release guidance to clarify UK employment status case law
He says the company imposes a financial penalty if he deviates from the instruction manual or the drawn plans for a job, or if he does not give at least 72 hours’ notice if he is unable to attend a job.
Lockwood also claims that if he were to decline assignments from Sharps it would stop giving him work, and that the company deducts payments directly from his wages for taxes and workplace liability insurance.
Ryan Bradshaw, a senior associate solicitor at law firm Leigh Day, said: “David has been a loyal worker for Sharps Bedrooms Ltd for decades, yet the company treat him as a subcontractor and are in control of David’s work, setting the fees and parameters of his work.
“Furthermore, they are allegedly assuring customers that David is a member of their staff, yet putting ‘subcontractor’ on his pay statements and terms of engagement.
Lockwood said: “After working for 25-plus years in full-time service to Sharps Bedrooms, I feel totally failed and disrespected by them. I believe that they have used unlawful loopholes to take advantage of hard and loyal workers.”
A Sharps spokesperson said: “We disagree with the claims made by David Lockwood and Leigh Day and will be robustly challenging any legal action.”
There have been several major cases concerning employment status in the gig economy. In 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that Uber drivers are workers, primarily because the company sets fares for each ride, imposes penalties on drivers who cancel rides and has control over the way drivers work because of its rating system.
However, the Supreme Court has also found that Deliveroo riders do not meet the definition of workers because they are not required to carry out their work personally and can provide a substitute.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more human resources jobs
