Apprentice dismissed after raising National Minimum Wage concern: claim fails
A trainee project manager who was dismissed after complaining about underpayment of the National Minimum Wage lost his claim for automatic unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the real reason was performance and conduct issues.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #trainee-project-manager
- #apprenticeship
- #national-minimum-wage
- #assertion-of-statutory-right
- #reinstatement-on-appeal
- #less-than-two-years-service
Key facts
- The claimant started employment on 1 September 2021 as a Trainee Project Manager under an apprenticeship arrangement.
- In December 2022 the claimant raised concerns about not being paid the correct National Minimum Wage.
- The respondent acknowledged a human error and paid back pay of £821.97 on 22 December 2022.
- The claimant was dismissed on 13 January 2023 for reasons including timekeeping, expense management, and attitude.
- The claimant appealed and was reinstated on 16 February 2023, but later indicated he did not wish to return.
- The tribunal found that the principal reason for dismissal was not the assertion of a statutory right but a range of performance and conduct concerns.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant started as Trainee Project Manager, an apprenticeship role.
-
Claimant requested meeting
Claimant requested a meeting; meeting held on 22 August 2022 with Mr Cox and Ms Metaj to discuss concerns about attitude and performance.
-
Claimant raised NMW concern
Claimant raised concerns about not being paid the correct National Minimum Wage with Ms Metaj.
-
Back pay received
Claimant received back payment of £821.97 for underpaid wages.
-
Decision to dismiss
Mr Cox and Ms Metaj decided to dismiss the claimant; Managing Director agreed.
-
Meeting and dismissal
Meeting held; claimant was told his employment was terminated, offered option to resign, and given 24 hours to decide.
-
Dismissal letter
Claimant was summarily dismissed for lack of honesty regarding expenses, timekeeping, and behaviour.
-
Appeal lodged
Claimant appealed the dismissal.
-
Appeal meeting
Appeal meeting conducted by John Regan, Finance Director.
-
Reinstatement
Appeal upheld; claimant reinstated with continuous employment and a formal performance procedure to commence.
-
Claimant indicated no wish to return
Claimant emailed stating he no longer wished to work for the respondent.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the reason or principal reason for the claimant's dismissal was that he asserted a statutory right to be paid the National Minimum Wage, which would make it automatically unfair under section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for automatically unfair dismissal.
The key reason was that the respondent had genuine concerns about the claimant's timekeeping, expense management, and attitude, which predated the wage complaint. The wage issue was acknowledged and corrected promptly, and the dismissal decision was made after a series of performance issues.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service have limited unfair dismissal rights, but automatic unfair dismissal for asserting a statutory right has no service requirement.
- To succeed in a section 104 claim, the employee must show that the assertion of the statutory right was the principal reason for dismissal, not just a factor.
- Employers should document performance concerns separately from any wage disputes to avoid the appearance of retaliation.
- Promptly correcting a wage error and communicating openly about it can help rebut a claim that the complaint motivated the dismissal.
A wage complaint that wasn't the real reason for dismissal
This case shows the difficulty of proving that a dismissal was motivated by an employee's assertion of a statutory right, especially when there is a history of performance and conduct issues. The claimant, a trainee project manager on an apprenticeship, raised a concern about not being paid the National Minimum Wage in December 2022. The employer acknowledged the error and paid back pay of £821.97 within weeks. However, the claimant was dismissed a month later for reasons including timekeeping, expense management, and attitude.
The tribunal accepted that the wage complaint was a factor, but not the principal reason. The employer had documented concerns about the claimant's performance and conduct over several months, including a meeting in August 2022. The tribunal noted that the claimant had been reinstated on appeal, which further suggested that the dismissal was not a knee-jerk reaction to the wage complaint.
What the employer did right
The employer acted promptly to correct the wage error and communicated openly about it. They also had a clear disciplinary policy that allowed for dismissal without following the full procedure for employees with less than two years' service. The tribunal found that the decision to dismiss was based on a range of issues, not the wage complaint alone.
What this means for similar claims
For employees, this case highlights the importance of gathering evidence that the statutory right assertion was the real reason for dismissal. For employers, it shows that maintaining clear records of performance and conduct issues can provide a strong defence against claims of retaliation. The outcome also underscores the limited protection for employees with less than two years' service, except for automatically unfair reasons.
Similar cases
Apprentice dismissed after asserting right to tax rebate: automatically unfair
A digital marketing apprentice who was dismissed days after writing to her employer about an unpaid tax rebate has won her claim for automatically unfair dismissal. The Manchester tribunal awarded £3,963.97 in compensation.
Administrative error leads to revocation of dismissal judgment: tribunal allows claim to proceed
A former employee who responded to a tribunal direction within time but used the wrong case number had her unfair dismissal claim reinstated after the tribunal revoked its original judgment.
Short-service employee wins wage claim but unfair dismissal struck out
A former employee with less than two years' service had her unfair dismissal claim struck out, but won £340 in unauthorised deduction and breach of contract claims.
Former employee's unfair dismissal claim struck out after failing to engage with tribunal
A former employee who failed to attend hearings and ignored tribunal orders had his unfair dismissal claim struck out. The tribunal also noted he had less than two years' service, which normally bars such claims.