header-logo header-logo

EAT rules two jobs allowed if compatible

14 January 2010
Issue: 7400 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Individuals can be employed by different employers at the same time, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled.

In Prison Officers Association v Gough [2009] UKEAT 0405/09_1712, the respondents were employed by the Prison Service and were also officials of the Prison Officers Association, the trade union for prison staff.

Mr Justice Silber considered whether the respondents were employed by the Association in “light of the functions they performed for them”, and whether they could be employees of both. He held that they could, as long as the jobs were compatible with each other.

Silber J ruled that it was proper to apply the test set out in 102 Social Club and Institute Ltd v Bickerton [1977] ICR 911 to the respondents’ work. These covered factors such as whether the payment was fixed in advance, like a salary, or whether it was decided at the end of the year; the extent and weight of the duties performed; and the size of the payment.

Delivering judgment, Silber J said: “There is no different question of principle which precludes a person having two jobs with separate employers at the same time provided they are compatible with each other.

“In the present case, it is not said that there could be anything incompatible with employees of the Prison Service also being employees of the respondent.”

 

Issue: 7400 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll