News & publications
Trainee unable to claim unfair dismissal- 27/01/2012
In GE Caledonian Ltd v McCandliss the EAT held that a former apprentice who had been sponsored by the company to undertake a degree had not been dismissed when the company refused to employ him following his withdrawal from the course.
The Claimant, Mr McCandliss, had completed a three year apprenticeship with the Respondent, GE Caledonian Ltd. He then decided to undertake a degree and the Respondent agreed to sponsor him through the course and entered into a sponsorship contract with him. The contract set out that he would be paid £1,200 per term, subject to satisfactory grades being achieved; that he was expected to do paid “industrial training” for the Respondent during his summer holidays; and that he was to offer his services “for continued employment” with the Respondent for two years upon completing the university degree. If he decided to resign from his position within that two year period, he was to pay back his sponsorship money. The contract also stated that “all other terms and conditions of employment” were to apply.
The Claimant began the degree and worked for the Respondent during his summer holidays. Before he started the final year of his course, the Claimant contacted the Respondent to say that he was going to withdraw from the degree for personal reasons and requested that he go back to his full-time position with the Respondent. He was told that he had never had a full-time position with the Respondent, as he had previously worked for them as an apprentice and his current contract only provided for placement work during the summer holidays. The Respondent offered him an internship as an alternative however he did not accept the offer. The Respondent treated his sponsorship contract as being terminated at the request of the Claimant.
The tribunal held that the dismissal was unfair. However, the claim was dismissed on appeal. The EAT held that the tribunal had failed to address whether they had the jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim in the first place. The claim is only available to employees. A sponsorship or training contract does not give an individual statutory employment rights, and so after examining the true relationship between the parties it was held that the Claimant had not been working under a contract of employment at all. The overarching purpose of the relationship was to advance the Claimant’s training, and was not to provide employment. Although references to employment were made in the wording of the sponsorship contract, this did not detract from the actual objective of the contract.
The case illustrates that the tribunal will look at the nature of the actual relationship between the parties in establishing whether an employment relationship exists. Where a student works for a sponsoring company throughout their studies, it is unlikely that this will be considered to be an employment relationship, as the primary purpose is likely to be held to be training rather than employment.
For further information, please contact Daff Richardson, Eugene Wojciechowski, Tom Walker or Sarah Johnson.