Unauthorised deductions from pay

New and updated

• Type:

  Employment law guide

  Deductions from wages and attachment of earnings

  The case of Adamu v The Kingsdale Foundation confirmed that where the contractual documentation entitles pay within the upper range dependent upon performance, the employer is required to pay employees at least the minimum amount within the upper range, and anything more is dependent on the outcome of a performance review. This highlights to HR teams that any increase in pay should be based on a documented assessment, rather than assumed or withheld without justification.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Homeworking: Employee who moved north not entitled to London weighting

  In McKenzie-Bayliss v The Crown Prosecution Service, an employment tribunal held that a homeworking employee who relocated to North-East England but carried out work for the South-East region was no longer entitled to receive pay at the London rate.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Right to work: Employer wrong to rely on checking service

  In Badara v Pulse Healthcare Ltd, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the employer should not have relied solely on negative Home Office checks when it dismissed the employee for failing to provide right to work documentation.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Deductions from wages: Tribunals have jurisdiction to construe employment contract

  In Agarwal v Cardiff University and another; Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive t/a Nexus v Anderson and others, the Court of Appeal held that employment tribunals have jurisdiction to construe contractual terms in the context of a claim for unlawful deductions from wages.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case round-up

  David Malamatenios is a partner and Krishna Santra, Sandra Martins and Colin Makin are senior associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case round-up

  Claire Thomas is managing associate, and Chris McAvoy, Joelle Parkinson, David Rintoul, and Gerri Hurst associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Boots unlawfully reduced long-serving workers' pay premium for Sundays and bank holidays

  In this case, the retailer Boots took a business decision to reduce long-serving workers' double time for Sunday and bank holiday working to time-and-a-half, but the employment tribunal found this to be an unlawful variation of the workers' terms and conditions of employment.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Case round-up

  Georgina Kyriacou and David Malamatenios are partners and Sandra Martins, Colin Makin and Krishna Santra are associates at Colman Coyle Solicitors. They round up the latest rulings.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  NHS trust's decision to withhold pay increment for staff who pass sickness absence trigger ruled unlawful

  In this test case, the employment tribunal found that an NHS trust had unlawfully amended its pay progression policy to provide that staff would be denied a pay rise if their sickness absence reached a certain level.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  TUPE transferee unlawfully removed sick pay and reduced holiday entitlement one year after transfer

  The employer in this case fell into the trap of assuming that, as long as it waited for a while (one year in this case) after a TUPE transfer, it could detrimentally alter the contractual benefits of employees who had transferred, in a bid to harmonise its workforce's terms and conditions.