Use it or lose it — EAT refuses to imply term requiring payment for unused flexitime

The claimant in Vision Events (UK) Ltd v Paterson worked as an event technician. He was paid a salary and an hourly rate for overtime. When he was promoted to the position of multimedia producer, his salary increased from £21,000 to £28,000 but his overtime pay ceased. He was, however, entitled to participate in a flexitime scheme, whereby if he worked more than his contractual 45 hours a week he was entitled to take time off at a time to suit his employer. There was no documentation in the handbook or the contract of employment on how accrued but untaken flexi-hours would be dealt with on termination of employment.

When, four years later, the claimant was made redundant, he asked to be paid for in excess of 1,000 hours of flexitime. His employer offered to pay a portion of the hours but the claimant refused and the offer was withdrawn. At the employment tribunal, his claim for unfair dismissal was rejected but the unlawful deductions from wages claim for failure to pay the flexitime hours succeeded and the employer was ordered to pay him more than £12,000…

Click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing.

Briefings from Hogan Lovells

View more briefings from Hogan Lovells

Analysis from The Lawyer

View more analysis from The Lawyer


Atlantic House
Holborn Viaduct

Turnover (£m): 1,098.00
No. of lawyers: 2,313 (UK 200)
Jurisdiction: UK
No. of offices: 9
No. of qualified lawyers: 206 (International 50)