Music tutors were employees, not self-employed: a lesson in worker classification
A tribunal found that music tutors for a charity were employees despite being treated as self-employed, entitling them to redundancy and holiday pay.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #music-tutor
- #charity
- #self-employed-misclassification
- #redundancy
- #holiday-pay
- #notice-pay
- #written-particulars
Key facts
- The claimants were music tutors for a charity and considered themselves self-employed.
- They submitted invoices but were paid an hourly rate set by the respondent.
- The respondent had policies and procedures the claimants had to follow.
- The claimants were made redundant on 12 July 2019 when told not to attend work.
- The tribunal found the claimants were employees under s.230 ERA.
Timeline
-
Respondent incorporated
Rhythmix was incorporated as a private limited company by guarantee.
-
Claimants made redundant
The claimants were told not to attend work due to financial difficulties.
-
Insolvency proceedings announced
The respondent informed claimants it was pursuing insolvency proceedings.
-
Creditors Voluntary Liquidation
The respondent entered into a Creditors Voluntary Liquidation.
-
Preliminary hearing
It was agreed the tribunal could consider claims of four lead claimants on the papers.
-
Substantive hearing on papers
Employment Judge Wright considered the case on the papers.
-
Liability judgment
The tribunal found the claimants were employees of R1.
-
Remedy judgment by consent
The tribunal issued judgments by consent awarding compensation to each claimant.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the music tutors were employees of Rhythmix under s.230(1) Employment Rights Act 1996, despite being treated as self-employed and submitting invoices.
The outcome
The tribunal ruled that the music tutors were employees of Rhythmix. This was because they were directed where to work, paid an hourly rate set by the charity, subject to its policies (disciplinary, whistleblowing), and had to provide feedback in a set format. The fact they submitted invoices did not override the reality of their working relationship.
Compensation was awarded by consent in a later remedy judgment, but no breakdown is available.
Lessons & takeaways
- Being asked to submit invoices does not automatically make you self-employed – tribunals look at the reality of the working relationship.
- If your employer sets your pay rate, directs where you work, and requires you to follow their policies, you may be an employee regardless of your contract label.
- Charities and other organisations should be cautious about classifying workers as self-employed if they exercise significant control over how and when work is done.
- Employees who are misclassified as self-employed may still be entitled to redundancy pay, holiday pay, and notice pay if they are made redundant.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights how easily workers can be misclassified, especially in sectors like music education where freelance arrangements are common. The music tutors were told they were self-employed and submitted invoices, but the tribunal looked beyond the label. It found that the charity, Rhythmix, controlled when and where the tutors worked, set their hourly rate, and required them to follow internal policies. The tutors were also personally obliged to perform the work, and the charity provided equipment and training. These factors pointed to an employment relationship.
What the losing side could have done differently
Rhythmix could have avoided this outcome by properly assessing the employment status of its tutors from the start. If the charity wanted genuine self-employment, it would have needed to give tutors more autonomy – for example, letting them set their own rates, choose their own hours, and work for other organisations. Instead, the level of control exercised by Rhythmix made the tutors employees in all but name.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision is a reminder that employment status is determined by the reality of the working relationship, not by what the parties call it. Workers who are treated like employees – directed, controlled, and integrated into the business – may have rights to redundancy pay, holiday pay, and written particulars of employment, even if they have been paying tax as self-employed. For anyone in a similar situation, it is worth seeking legal advice if you believe you have been misclassified.
Similar cases
Bartender misclassified as self-employed wins holiday pay and notice
A bartender who was required to register as self-employed and paid by invoice has been awarded £2,492 after the tribunal found he was a worker entitled to holiday pay and notice.
Site closure without process: redundancy dismissal ruled unfair
A former employee with three years' service was unfairly dismissed after his site closed and the employer failed to follow any redundancy process. The tribunal awarded over £44,000 in compensation.
Kitchen manager dismissed without consultation in redundancy: unfair dismissal
A kitchen manager with two years' service was unfairly dismissed when her employer made her redundant without any consultation or warning. The tribunal awarded £4,809.49 in compensation.
Butcher awarded £11,871 after redundancy dismissal with no notice or holiday pay
A former butcher won £11,871 after his employer failed to pay notice, holiday pay, or a redundancy payment and did not attend the tribunal hearing.