Skip to main content
CLOSE

Charities

Close

Corporate and Commercial

Close

Employment and Immigration

Close

Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance

Close

Fraud and Investigations

Close

Individuals

Close

Litigation

Close

Planning and Infrastructure

Close

Public Law

Close

Real Estate

Close

Restructuring and Insolvency

Close

Energy

Close

Entrepreneurs

Close

Private Wealth

Close

Real Estate

Close

Tech and Innovation

Close

Transport

Close

In the landmark decision of Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake, the Supreme Court has clarified that sleep-in residential care workers are entitled to the national minimum wage (NMW) only when they are awake and actually working, not when they are asleep and just available for work. This means that a number of earlier decisions on sleep-in shifts can no longer be relied on.

Ms Tomlinson-Blake was employed as a care worker supporting vulnerable adults in their homes. Her shifts included overnight sleep-in shifts during which she was not allocated specific tasks but was required to listen out in case her help was needed during the night. The expectation was, however, that she would get an uninterrupted night’s sleep. Ms Tomlinson-Blake was paid £29.05 for a nine-hour sleep-in shift. She brought a claim arguing that every hour she spent on the sleep-in shift should be paid the NMW, even when she was asleep.

The Supreme Court has now agreed with the Court of Appeal that under the wording of the NMW legislation, Ms Tomlinson-Blake was not entitled to the NMW for every hour on shift. For a worker to be paid NMW on a sleep-in shift, they must be ‘awake for the purposes of working’, meaning that they must be available and have some duties to perform. It is not relevant that they have to keep a ‘listening ear’ out while asleep. The Supreme Court noted that the rules on sleep-in shifts were originally based on the recommendations of the Low Pay Commission (LPC) in 1998, a statutory body which was set up when the NMW was first enacted. The LPC recommended in 1998 that sleep-in workers should receive an allowance and not the NMW, unless they were awake for the purposes of working.

This decision finally brings certainty to the issue of payments for sleep-in shifts and will be welcomed by many employers, particularly those in the care sector who were facing significant claims for backpay. However, it does not deal with the political issue of low pay in this sector, an area where there is now pressure for legislative change.

Latest articles

Our Offices

London
One Bartholomew Close
London
EC1A 7BL

Cambridge
20 Station Road
Cambridge
CB1 2JD

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

 

Reading
The Anchorage, 34 Bridge Street
Reading RG1 2LU

Southampton
4 Grosvenor Square
Southampton SO15 2BE

  • Lexcel
  • CYBER ESSENTIALS PLUS

© BDB Pitmans 2024. One Bartholomew Close, London EC1A 7BL - T +44 (0)345 222 9222

Our Services

Charities chevron
Corporate and Commercial chevron
Employment and Immigration chevron
Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance chevron
Fraud and Investigations chevron
Individuals chevron
Litigation chevron
Planning and Infrastructure chevron
Public Law chevron
Real Estate chevron
Restructuring and Insolvency chevron

Sectors and Groups

Private Wealth chevron
Transport chevron