Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake · [2021] UKSC 8
UK Supreme Court · 19 March 2021
A care worker could be required to stay overnight and still have a different minimum-wage entitlement from a colleague working an active night shift. Mrs Tomlinson-Blake provided support to two adults at home. During a sleep-in she was expected to sleep, stay on the premises and respond if assistance was needed.
Why the character of the shift mattered
The Supreme Court considered her claim alongside that of another care worker, Mr Shannon. For a genuine sleep-in of the kind before the court, the minimum-wage calculation included time spent awake for the purpose of working. Being required to remain on site did not make the entire shift count. Both appeals failed.
Consider two workers who each come in at ten at night. One is expected to sleep unless called and has suitable sleeping facilities. The other has scheduled rounds, cleaning and observations throughout the night, with occasional opportunities to rest. A payroll description of “sleep-in” cannot answer which arrangement either worker actually has.
Reconstruct a single night
Keep the rota, job instructions and pay statement. Write a timeline distinguishing scheduled tasks, calls for help, time spent carrying them out and the facilities provided for sleep. Avoid including care recipients’ identifying details in a personal record. Check the employment contract separately. An agreed overnight payment may be more generous than the statutory minimum. The Supreme Court decided the minimum-wage issue on the particular working arrangements before it.
Read the judgment in Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake · Government guidance on hours and minimum wage
Related reading · Waiting between fares in Uber v Aslam
