Miss G Shepherdson and Miss M Paris-Matić v LOOP International Ltd: 3201134/2023
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Case No 3201134/2023
Between
Miss Grace Shepherdson [First Claimant] Miss Madison Paris-Matić [Second Claimant]ClaimantLOOP International LtdRespondent
Before
Employment Judge ShoreIn person for claimantNo Appearance for respondentDate 20 October 2023
JUDGMENT
[1]The first claimant’s claim for unauthorised deduction from wages is well founded and succeeds.[2]The respondent will pay the first claimant, Grace Shepherdson, £750.00, gross, without deduction of tax or National insurance for unauthorised deduction from wages.[3]The respondent failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures, so the award of £750.00 is uplifted by 10% (£75.00).[4]The first claimant’s claim for holiday pay is well founded and succeeds.[5]The respondent will pay the first claimant, Grace Shepherdson, for unpaid holiday pay, £2,769.20 (calculated as 20 days x £138.46), gross, without deduction of tax or National insurance.[6]The respondent failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures, so the award of £2,769.20 is uplifted by 10% (£276.92).[7]The respondent failed to give the first claimant a written statement of terms and conditions of employment as required by section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1 of 2 Case Number: 3201134/2023 1996. The first claimant has succeeded in a claim specified by Schedule 5 of the Employment Act 2002, so the respondent shall pay the first claimant, Grace Shepherdson, 4 weeks’ gross pay, capped at £643.00 er week = £2,572.00.[8]The respondent shall pay the first claimant a preparation time order of 20 hours at £41.00 per hour = £810.00.[9]The total payable to Grace Shepherdson by the respondent is £7,253.12.[10]The second claimant’s claim for unauthorised deduction from wages is well founded and succeeds.[11]The respondent will pay the second claimant, Madison Paris-Matić, £750.00, gross, without deduction of tax or National insurance for unauthorised deduction from wages.[12]The respondent failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures, so the award of £750.00 is uplifted by 10% (£75.00).[13]The second claimant’s claim for holiday pay is well founded and succeeds.[14]The respondent will pay the second claimant, Madison Paris-Matić, for unpaid holiday pay, £3,046.16 (calculated as 22 days x £138.46), gross, without deduction of tax or National insurance.[15]The respondent failed to comply with the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures, so the award of £3,046.16 is uplifted by 10% (£304.62).[16]The respondent failed to give the second claimant a written statement of terms and conditions of employment as required by section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The second claimant has succeeded in a claim specified by Schedule 5 of the Employment Act 2002, so the respondent shall pay the second claimant, Madison Paris-Matić, 4 weeks’ gross pay, capped at £643.00 per week = £2,572.00.[17]The respondent shall pay the second claimant, Madison Paris-Matić, a preparation time order of 20 hours at £41.00 per hour = £810.00.[18]The total payable to Madison Paris-Matić by the respondent is £7,557.78.