Furlough, holiday pay, and written particulars: mixed result for motor technician
A motor technician who was dismissed for unauthorised absence after a dispute over furlough pay won £2,860 for unpaid holiday and missing written particulars, but lost his unfair dismissal claim.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- Claimant was employed as a motor technician from 9 March 2013 to 10 September 2021.
- Claimant was furloughed from April 2020 and received 80% wages from June to October 2020.
- Claimant did not return to work after 1 November 2020 and claimed state benefits.
- Respondent failed to provide written statement of employment particulars.
- Claimant was entitled to 25 days holiday per year; holiday pay claim limited to 10 May 2019 – 10 May 2021.
- Claimant was dismissed for unauthorised absence; dismissal held fair.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began work as a motor technician for Leinster Motor Engineering Ltd.
-
Furlough decision
Respondent decided to furlough staff due to COVID-19.
-
Furlough letter
Respondent confirmed furlough arrangements in writing.
-
Other staff returned
Other staff returned to work; claimant remained on furlough due to health conditions.
-
Claimant worked four days
Claimant attended work for four days in July 2020.
-
Claimant presented letter
Claimant gave respondent a letter claiming owed wages and stating he would return if paid.
-
Claimant stopped working
Claimant did not attend work from this date and claimed state benefits.
-
Dismissal
Respondent dismissed claimant for unauthorised absence.
-
Hearing day 1
First day of final hearing; strike-out and amendment applications heard.
-
Hearing day 2
Second day of hearing; reconsideration application refused.
-
Hearing day 3
Third day of hearing; evidence and submissions.
-
Judgment sent
Reserved judgment with reasons sent to parties.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer made unlawful deductions from wages (including furlough pay, holiday pay, and minimum wage), whether the dismissal was unfair, and whether the employer failed to provide written particulars of employment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed most of the claims, including those for unpaid furlough contributions, minimum wage, and unfair dismissal. However, it upheld two claims:
- Holiday pay (April 2020 – May 2021): The employer failed to pay holiday pay for this period, resulting in an award of £1,838.95.
- Written particulars: The employer did not provide a compliant written statement of employment terms, leading to an additional award of £1,021.64 (two weeks' gross pay).
The total compensation awarded was £2,860.59.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees should ensure they have a written contract of employment; if not provided, they can claim up to four weeks' pay as compensation.
- Holiday pay claims are limited to the two years before the claim was presented, so act promptly if you believe you are owed holiday pay.
- Furlough pay disputes: employers are not required to top up furlough pay to 100% unless the contract says so; the 80% government scheme does not create a contractual right to full pay.
- If you stop attending work without authorisation, even if you believe you are owed wages, you risk being fairly dismissed for unauthorised absence.
- Tribunals will not allow late amendments to add historical wage claims that have no reasonable prospect of success.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how a breakdown in communication during the pandemic can lead to multiple legal claims — and how only some of them will succeed. The motor technician, who had worked for the garage for eight years, was furloughed in April 2020. When other staff returned in June, he remained on furlough due to health concerns. He worked only four days in July, then stopped attending altogether from November 2020, claiming he was owed wages. The employer dismissed him for unauthorised absence in September 2021.
The tribunal found the dismissal fair because the employee had simply stopped coming to work without permission. But it also found that the employer had failed to pay holiday pay for the period April 2020 to May 2021, and had never provided a written contract — both of which are basic legal obligations.
What the losing side could have done differently
The employer could have avoided the holiday pay claim by ensuring that holiday was properly recorded and paid, even during furlough. It could also have avoided the written particulars claim by providing a compliant section 1 statement at the start of employment. For the employee, the key lesson is that stopping work without authorisation — even if you believe you are owed money — is risky. A grievance or tribunal claim for unpaid wages would have been a safer route than self-help.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that furlough did not create a contractual right to full pay unless the employer agreed. The tribunal rejected the claim for the employer's 20% top-up because there was no contractual entitlement. It also shows that holiday pay claims are strictly limited to the two years before the claim was presented — older claims will be struck out. Finally, the award for missing written particulars, while modest (two weeks' pay), is an automatic penalty that employees can claim without proving any financial loss.
Similar cases
Constructive dismissal claim fails but holiday pay awarded for cash-in-hand worker
A counter assistant who resigned after receiving a written warning for sickness absence lost her unfair dismissal claim, but was awarded £4,777.50 for unpaid holiday pay over nine years.
Cleaner dismissed during Covid-19: employer's failure to respond leads to £2,719 payout
A part-time cleaner who was dismissed after asking to be furloughed has won her unfair dismissal claim after her employer failed to submit a response to the tribunal.
TUPE transfer meant employer was not liable for constructive dismissal
Two employees who claimed constructive dismissal and unfair dismissal against Britannia Driving School Ltd had their claims dismissed after the tribunal found a TUPE transfer had already moved their employment to another company.
Security patrol officer loses race discrimination claim but wins holiday pay for sick leave
A tribunal dismissed claims that a security officer was left out of furlough and overlooked because of his race, but awarded £984 for unpaid holiday accrued during sickness.