- Details
A step towards change?
The Supreme Court in the case of Harpur Trust v Brazel [2022] UKSC 21, has caused massive implications for employers of sessional workers or term-time only workers.![]()
By way of summary the Supreme Court held that there is no legal right to pro rata holidays for part year workers. This means that workers and employees such as Ms. Brazel are entitled to receive the full entitlement of 5.6 weeks holiday, regardless of how much time they work per year.
This has created an anomaly for employers who are faced with paying the same amount of holiday pay for term time only workers as that provided to full time workers, which doesn’t appear to be fair in the circumstances.
We therefore welcome the fact that BEIS have launched a consultation into calculating holiday entitlement for part-year and irregular hours workers. In the consultation BEIS proposes retaining the current 52-week reference period for holiday pay calculation for all workers.
However, this would now include weeks where no work is done by the worker. This is contrary to the current position where weeks where a person has not worked are excluded from the 52 weeks. BEIS state that this would bring holiday pay entitlements in line with the actual time workers spend working, which would be a more equitable approach for employers.
In addition, BEIS states this process provides benefits for workers; it argues that under the current system, an employer could be incentivized to engage a worker for as little as one hour a week to avoid having to exclude an unworked week. Doing this would reduce the worker’s overall entitlement and pay.
BEIS state they are seeking views from all stakeholders, including employers, workers, business representative groups, unions, and those representing the interests of groups in the labour market.
The consultation will be open until 11:45pm on 9 March 2023.
Julie Bann is a partner and Beth Edwards is a trainee solicitor at Sharpe Pritchard LLP.
This article is for general awareness only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this page was first published. If you would like further advice and assistance in relation to any issue raised in this article, please contact us by telephone or email
For further insight and resources on local government legal issues from Sharpe Pritchard, please visit the SharpeEdge page by clicking on the banner below.
This article is for general awareness only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this page was first published. If you would like further advice and assistance in relation to any issue raised in this article, please contact us by telephone or email
|
Click here to view our archived articles or search below.
|
|
ABOUT SHARPE PRITCHARD
We are a national firm of public law specialists, serving local authorities, other public sector organisations and registered social landlords, as well as commercial clients and the third sector. Our team advises on a wide range of public law matters, spanning electoral law, procurement, construction, infrastructure, data protection and information law, planning and dispute resolution, to name a few key specialisms. All public sector organisations have a route to instruct us through the various frameworks we are appointed to. To find out more about our services, please click here.
|
|
OUR RECENT ARTICLES
August 04, 2026
High Court Orders Government to Pay Costs Following Free Speech Union Judicial ReviewGeorge McLellan and Olly Dickie share an update on Sharpe Pritchard's successful representation of the Free Speech Union, with the court ordering the Education Secretary to pay the costs of a judicial review.
August 04, 2026
Case Update: Section 106 Mortgagee Exclusion Clauses: What Developers & LPAs Need to KnowRebecca Stewart considers the implications of the Court of Appeal's recent decision to dismiss Westminster City Council’s appeal in a dispute over whether a purchaser was bound to provide flats at affordable events. The case concerned 16 flats which had been secured as…
August 04, 2026
Beyond Potholes: What Does a Modern Highways Maintenance Contract Need to Achieve?Jane Crees sets out what local authorities need to know when it comes to their highways maintenance contracts. We have been thinking a lot recently about what local authorities need from their highways maintenance contracts, particularly after working with several authorities on…
August 04, 2026
Court of Appeal Dismisses Westminster’s Appeal in Section 106 Affordable Housing CaseRebecca Stewart and Rachel Lee explain what you need to know about mortgagee exclusion clauses in section 106 agreements, in light of a recent Court of Appeal decision. The Court of Appeal has dismissed Westminster City Council’s appeal in Westminster City Council v GEMS House…
|
|
OUR KEY LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTACTS
|
||
|
Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
Rachel Murray-Smith Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Jo Pickering Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Emyr Thomas Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Gemma Duncan Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||
|
|
||
|
Simon Kiely Partner 020 7406 4600 Find out more |
||





Catherine Newman




