Yes, according to the decision in Dewhurst v Revisecatch & City Sprint. Employment Judge Joffe, sitting alone in the London Central Employment Tribunal, found that an individual who is not an employee but still falls into the category of 'worker' should be viewed as an 'employee' for the purposes of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations (TUPE). This means that such 'workers' are afforded the same rights and protections as 'employees' under TUPE.
One of the biggest barriers to gender equality and pay parity is a continuing resistance by employers to embrace agile working. A recent joint study from flexible working specialists, Timewise, and Deloitte set out a five step plan to help employers establish and implement new working cultures with the aim of improving pay parity between men and women.
We blogged in June last year about the employment tribunal claim of Ali -v- Capita Customer Management Ltd where Mr Ali was successful in his claim for direct sex discrimination. Female employees at Capita were entitled to 14 weeks’ full pay on maternity leave whereas fathers were only entitled to two weeks’ full pay on paternity and shared parental leave. Mr Ali's wife was advised to return to work early from maternity leave after being diagnosed with post natal depression. Mr Ali asked Capita whether he could take leave instead and was told he could take shared parental leave on statutory pay. The Tribunal found that this was direct sex discrimination.