The Supreme Court’s decision last year that determined a group of Domino’s Pizza delivery drivers to be employees rather than self-employed individuals could potentially impact the larger ‘gig’ economy. This has been underscored by the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) referencing the aforementioned verdict to award a long-serving violinist of the Michael English Band, Matt McGranaghan, nearly €44,000 for unlawful termination and other employment-related infringances. McGranaghan is deemed an employee of MEPC Music Ltd, the business running the band, rather than a self-employed individual.
The ‘gig’ economy is recognisable by temporary contracts, occasional tasks, and uninsured work, in contrast to traditional, regular employment. Employers benefit from not having to provide paid leave, retirement plans, or other worker benefits. However, critics argue this puts a strain on workers in the gig industry, yielding a lower income and less protection than employees in traditional roles. Government departments are critical of false self-employment cases where temporary workers are incorrectly categorised as self-employed rather than employees.
2018 data from the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) commanded by the WRC illustrates that there were 200,000 people occupying non-permanent positions at that time. The same research concluded that temporary workers earned approximately 20 per cent less than people engaged in similar roles but in permanent positions.
McGranaghan’s win with the WRC is quite significant. He has independently collaborated with singers like Dolores Keane, Nathan Carter and Mary Black. It is, however, expensive for MEPC Music. Directors of this company include country holiday music promoter, Paul Claffey. Despite performing with the band in over 1,000 shows spanning eight years, McGranaghan was let go via an email by Claffey.
McGranaghan is due to receive €43,840 as a result of his complaints.
Caroline Reidy, a WRC adjudicator, recently made a notable ruling, implementing the result of a Supreme Court verdict to the advantage of Mr McGranaghan. This has prompted queries regarding whether we will see a surge in similar cases as a result of the Supreme Court’s judgement. Employment law expert, solicitor Anne O’Connell, suggested it’s too soon to predict but mentioned that we should expect some decisions from those cases filed consequent to the Supreme Court’s judgement to begin to emerge.
To ascertain if a worker should be deemed an employee or contractor, the court defined five guidelines. These involve examining the extent of control an employer has over a potential employee to decide if the existing arrangement could be considered an employment agreement. In each of these evaluations, Mr McGranaghan was classified as an employee. Reidy provided a statement declaring, “On the basis of the current arrangement, I conclude he’s an employee.”
Beyond this, Ms O’Connell emphasised that this ruling may instigate both employers and employees to look back at their casual agreements. She advised that those interacting with contractors or self-employed workers should examine their arrangements whilst the relations are still positive to avoid future implications. She also added that, workers intending to stay as contractors might have to set up limited companies to reinforce such agreements legally. If not, they might experience difficulties in finding engagements due to the associated risks.