Was a pilot supplied through an agency for Ryanair employed or self-employed?

He was employed by the agency, held the Court of Appeal. 

We understand that some 27 cases on this subject have been stayed pending this decision. The courts are going to be busy and this case will for sure open some floodgates. 

In Lutz v Ryanair & Anor Jason Lutz worked as a pilot for Ryanair through an intermediary company (MCG). 

Ryanair and MCG claimed he was self-employed. 

Mr Lutz argued that he was employed by MCG under the Civil Aviation (Working Time) Regulations 2004 (CAWR) and therefore entitled to holiday pay.

He also argued that he was an agency worker under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010 (AWR) and therefore entitled to receive the same terms as pilots who were employed directly by Ryanair.

MCG had complicated the arrangements by contracting with Mr Lutz through a service company. 

Ryanair argued Mr Lutz could not be an agency worker for the purposes of the AWR because his five-year engagement was not temporary.

The Court of Appeal rejected both arguments from MCG and Ryanair instead finding in favour of Mr Lutz. 

The Court of Appeal noted that:

• Mr Lutz was not in business on his own account and therefore was not self-employed. An employment relationship existed somewhere.
• The employment relationship could be found within the contract with MCG which created an employment relationship with MCG for CAWR purposes despite their attempts to circumvent the CAWR by use of a service company. 
• There was no need for the Court to imply a contract with Ryanair. An express contract existed with MCG. It was not relevant that Ryanair controlled his work. The contract was with MCG.
• A five-year supply agreement could still constitute a temporary supply under the AWR and the length of the fixed period was not relevant. Mr Lutz therefore did have protection as an agency worker under the AWR.
  

This blog was written by Manuela de Castro, Senior Solicitor at didlaw.