Using statutory rules to bridge gaps in employment continuity

There are various rules and principles of employment law that may help zero-hours contract workers and other casual workers to bring employment tribunal claims that rely on continuity of service.

For example, under sections 210 to 219 of the ERA 96, a gap of less than one week will not break continuity even if, during that week, the employee goes off to work for another employer and then returns. It does not matter how many days or hours are worked during each week, as long as some work is done. In Vernon v Event Management Catering Limited (UKEAT/0161/97/LA), a casual worker was able to demonstrate enough service for an unfair dismissal claim on this basis, by analysing the gaps between each separate period of employment. It pays to keep a good record of hours and days worked.

Similarly, in Cornwall County Council v Prater [2006] IRLR 362, homeworker Margaret Prater was employed to teach pupils “as and when needed”. She was able to bring a claim for unfair dismissal because the tribunal decided that gaps in between each assignment were “temporary cessations of work” which did not break service continuity.

Also, remember that many employment rights, for example most kinds of automatic unfair dismissal, are available from day one of the employment, as long as the individual has the status of employee. No service is needed so as a matter of law, employees on zero-hours employment contracts can enforce these rights.