Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>Patterson v Ashe [2024]
Patterson v Ashe [2024]
Published on: 17/04/2024
Issues Covered: Pay
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Jason Elliott BL Lecturer in Law and Barrister
Jason Elliott BL Lecturer in Law and Barrister

Jason Elliott was called to the Bar of Northern Ireland in 2013 and is the Associate Head of School of Law at Ulster University.  As a practising barrister, he has developed a largely civil practice representing individuals, companies and public bodies in litigation. This covers a wide range of areas including personal injuries, wills and employment law. In terms of employment law, he has represented both applicants and respondents in the Industrial Tribunal.   At Ulster University, Jason lectures extensively on the civil areas of practise such as Equity and Trusts and delivers employment law lectures for both undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Background

Summary Description: 

A case in which some training payments could be deducted in line with the contract but others could not due to evidential issues.  

Background: 

The claimant was employed as an apprentice beauty therapist by the respondent from April 2021 until September 2022.   The issue arose from an alleged underpayment of wages relating to the cost of training courses undertaken while employed. 

The claimant’s contract stated: 

‘We shall be entitled to deduct from your wage or other payments due to you, any money which you may owe to the Company at any timeThis includes without limitation any overpayment of pay, commission or expenses, repayment of training costs…’ 

The claimant raised a grievance about her final pay relating to the amount paidPart of this was resolved in relation to outstanding Day Release payments meaning her pay changed from £432.08 to £978.99However, there were sums deducted in line with the Employee Handbook and Contract of EmploymentThe claimant asserts that she had never read her contract and that she had never read the Employee Handbook which she did say was kept in the staff room.   The claimant did sign the contract.   The respondent asserted that the claimant was liable for 50% of the cost of the training courses because she left her employment before the stipulated period of one year.    

Outcome: 

The Tribunal found that the term in the contract had been accepted by the claimant’s signatureHowever, on the deductions each had to be examined.   One of the deductions was relating to a gel nail course. The Tribunal held this was in line with the contractual termThe second was in relation to an eyelash course.   An issue arose about the training due to a technical issue and the claimant said that there should have been more assistance from the respondentThe Tribunal found that the claimant had demonstrated little effort in resolving the issue but found that as the issue arose with both parties that the deduction should be halvedThe last course was a piercing course. The respondent stated that the salon was closed to facilitate the claimant’s training yet the claimant said it was part of a team-building event.   The Tribunal found that the claimant was more credible citing that the other staff members were also in attendance at the salon that dayThe Tribunal did recognise the training aspect though and stated that it should be 50% of one third of the overall cost of the course.  

Practical Guidance for Employers: 

When it comes to training employers would rightly want to protect themselves by being able to claw back funds paid on a staff member who leaves shortly after the trainingWhere that is the case, then the nature of the training, the date of the training and its cost should be noted by the employerThis would provide an evidential basis should there be a deduction from the final pay relating to training as shown in this case.  

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

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 17/04/2024