.png)
.png)
When sweet turns to sour
Key points
- Lees operated a ‘holiday fund’ or ‘savings scheme’ to enable workers to save some of their pay. The intention was benevolent.
- The key legal issue in Lees was whether the holiday fund holdbacks were made ‘for the employer’s own use and benefit’.
- The EAT’s decision was that deductions were ‘made for the employer’s use or benefit’ because the funds were retained in the company’s bank account so it could use them.
- The EAT also found that the paying out of the savings did not equate to the amounts being paid for NMW purposes.
Lees the well known Scottish confectionary manufacturer whose products include macaroon bars snowballs and teacakes has lost in an appeal by HMRC to the employment appeal tribunal (EAT) in a national minimum wage (NMW) dispute.
For many years Lees operated a ‘holiday fund’ or ‘savings scheme’ to enable workers to save some of their...
Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this item in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
