Part-time army reservists as ‘workers’—whether less favourable treatment (Advocate-General for Scotland v Milroy)
Pensions analysis: The claimant, a part-time reservist, brought a complaint under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 alleging he had been treated less favourably than a full-time regular soldier as respects (a) for pension purposes, his service prior to 1 April 2015 and (b) his daily rate of pay. The Employment Tribunal found in the claimant’s favour. The Advocate-General for Scotland appealed, contending that the claimant was not a ‘worker’ within the Regulations, his daily rate of pay did not constitute less favourable treatment and his treatment as respects pay and prior service was not on the ground that he was a part-time worker. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) dismissed the appeal, holding that the tribunal below had not erred in law. The case applies the recognised principles for determining whether a person without an employment contract is a ‘worker’ to the new context of the armed forces. It is potentially relevant to all armed forces reservists. Written by Elizabeth Ovey, barrister at Radcliffe Chambers.