Temporary worker's contract not renewed: no automatic unfair dismissal for asserting rights
A temporary customer assistant who claimed his contract was not renewed because he raised holiday and sick pay issues has lost his automatic unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the non-renewal was due to business needs, not his statutory right assertions.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #temporary-contract
- #non-renewal
- #sick-pay
- #holiday-pay
- #oral-contract-allegation
- #acas-early-conciliation
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a temporary customer assistant from 19 November 2020 to 15 May 2021.
- His written contract specified core hours of 14 hours per week over two days, with additional flexible hours.
- The claimant alleged an oral contract or variation to work five days a week, which the tribunal rejected.
- He raised complaints about sick pay and holiday pay based on five days, but the tribunal found his contractual hours were two days.
- The claimant's temporary contract was not renewed due to a business need review, not because of his statutory right assertions.
- The tribunal dismissed all claims: automatic unfair dismissal, holiday pay, and unlawful deduction of wages.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant started as temporary customer assistant at Tesco Welling store.
-
Sick leave begins
Claimant off sick with COVID symptoms until 16 February 2021.
-
Sick leave ends
Claimant returned to work after 14 days sick leave.
-
HR discussion on holiday pay
Claimant contacted HR to dispute holiday entitlement, asserting it should be based on five days.
-
ACAS early conciliation started
Claimant contacted ACAS, initiating early conciliation.
-
Wage query raised
Claimant raised a wage query about an unpaid shift on 22 February 2021; payment was corrected next day.
-
Discussion with line manager
Claimant discussed holiday pay issue with Mr. Smith; told the issue was closed.
-
Non-renewal of contract
Claimant informed his temporary contract would not be renewed due to business need.
-
Employment ended
Effective date of termination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting a statutory right (sick pay and holiday pay), and whether he was owed additional pay based on an alleged oral contract to work five days a week.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims.
- Automatic unfair dismissal: The claimant's contract was not renewed due to a business need review, not because of his complaints about sick pay or holiday pay. The tribunal found no causal link between the statutory right assertions and the non-renewal.
- Holiday pay: The claimant's written contract specified 14 hours over two days. The tribunal rejected his claim of an oral contract for five days, so holiday pay was correctly calculated on the contractual basis.
- Sick pay: Similarly, sick pay was based on the contractual two-day week, not the alleged five-day week. No unlawful deduction occurred.
No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Temporary workers with short service should ensure any variations to their contract are in writing to avoid disputes over terms.
- Asserting a statutory right does not automatically protect you from non-renewal if there is a genuine business reason for the decision.
- Keep clear records of your contractual hours and any communications about changes to avoid misunderstandings later.
- If you believe your contract has been varied orally, gather evidence such as emails or witness statements to support your claim.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the difficulty temporary workers can face when trying to prove that their contract was not renewed because they raised a complaint about their rights. The claimant, a customer assistant employed by Tesco for just six months, argued that his temporary contract was not renewed because he had queried his sick pay and holiday pay entitlements. However, the tribunal accepted Tesco's evidence that the decision was based on a routine business need review, not retaliation.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant's case was weakened by his reliance on an alleged oral contract to work five days a week, which the tribunal rejected. Without written evidence of the variation, the tribunal stuck to the written terms of 14 hours over two days. If the claimant had obtained written confirmation of any changes to his working pattern, his pay claims might have had a stronger foundation. Additionally, the timing of his complaints and the non-renewal were close, but the tribunal found no direct link — a clearer chain of evidence might have helped.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces that employers can decline to renew a temporary contract for genuine business reasons, even if the employee has recently raised statutory rights issues. The key is the employer's motive: if the decision is unrelated to the complaint, the claim will fail. For workers on short-term contracts, it is crucial to document any contractual changes and to understand that the protection against detriment for asserting statutory rights does not guarantee renewal if there is a separate, legitimate reason for ending the engagement.
Similar cases
Client Services Director loses constructive dismissal claim after resigning over sick pay and alleged sex discrimination
A Client Services Director who resigned over unpaid sick pay and a claimed promotion of a male colleague has lost her constructive dismissal and sex discrimination claims. The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract.
No written contract leads to holiday pay win for former employee
A former employee of AC Precision Engineering Ltd was awarded £4,101 after the tribunal found the company unlawfully deducted holiday pay and failed to provide a written contract.
Store manager awarded £2,466 after employer deducted sick pay without agreement
A store manager with only 9 months' service won her claim for unauthorised wage deductions after her employer deducted sick pay she was promised. The tribunal ordered La Portegna Limited to pay £2,466.56.
25 years of service ended by constructive dismissal after role change and furlough breach
An administrator with 25 years' service won £21,237 after being constructively dismissed when her employer changed her role, required her to work while on furlough, and sent work during sick leave.