Select an area of expertise to find out more about our experience.
Find out more about our barristers and business support teams here.
In Leedham v Royal Mail Group Ltd, the EAT has upheld an employment tribunal’s decision that the requirement in S.8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, that a worker be ‘given’ an itemised pay statement by an employer, does not require physical delivery and can be satisfied by the provision of electronic access.
The question is whether the worker has been afforded access to the relevant information in a way that enables him or her to scrutinise and, if necessary, challenge it.
In the above case, from June 2023, the employer switched from paper payslips to a system whereby payslips could be accessed and viewed by employees online.
The EAT held that the meaning of ‘given’ in S.8 ERA was to be determined purposively, having regard to the need to avoid impracticable or commercially unrealistic outcomes.
However, the EAT emphasised that compliance with S.8 is fact-sensitive. A system that, whether by reason of cost, technical barriers or other constraints, prevents an individual worker from obtaining their payslip would not satisfy the statutory purpose.
16 April 2024
Chambers is delighted to announce that Head of Chambers, Jason Beer KC is one of only…
Discover more15 February 2023
This is an ‘Original Manuscript’ of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in the Journal…
Discover more14 February 2022
The first hearings of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry commenced today. Previously a non-statutory…
Discover more

