Background:

The claimant is a qualified physiotherapist who has been in practice as ‘Tony Barnett Bodytone Physiotherapy’.  The claimant stated that for the ‘other’ work he was self-employed.  The issue was that the claimant provided physiotherapy treatment and advice to the Northern Ireland Women’s Football Team, which is run by the respondent.  Payment for these services was by way of invoice generated by the claimant and was made to ‘Tony Barnett Bodytone Physiotherapy’.

In terms of the working arrangement between the claimant and the respondent, there were text exchanges in which the respondent sought to work around the claimant’s schedule (especially his activities with Universities).  The claimant was not subject to the internal procedures of the respondent.  When the team were travelling to a tournament, the claimant broke the Covid restrictions to which the team were subject.  The claimant accepts that it was a serious matter but that he was not subject to any disciplinary action from the respondent.  The claimant had contacted the respondent in relation to payments around the period of the pandemic stating that he was not entitled to furlough nor was he entitled to the self-employed scheme considering that more than 50% of his income was from outside sources such as the IFA and teaching which he described as ‘zero contracts’.  The relationship came to an end in December 2021 and the claimant brought proceedings for unfair dismissal and sex discrimination.

Outcome:

This was a preliminary hearing on the employment status of the claimant.   The Tribunal found that the claimant was self-employed.  It was a relationship of a professional in business on his own account providing services to a client organisation.   The claimant was not integral to the respondent’s operation and each of the intermittent occasions in which the claimant provided his services it was done freely through agreement. As a result, the claims were dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

This provides yet another case to the plethora of cases on employment status.  The difficulty here seemed to be the claimant’s view that he was working upon a zero hours contract for the respondent when in actual fact they should have been treated as another client to his self-employed business.  The Tribunal looked at the various factors to be taken into account in distinguishing between employee, worker and independent contractor status.  Considering the relationship and other factors such as the claimant’s representation to HMRC that he was self-employed it meant that the Tribunal found as such.

NI Tribunal decisions are available on the OITFET website:
http://www.employmenttribunalsni.co.uk/