By Maria Ward-Brennan
A Tribunal has thrown out a case against the 8th Earl Spencer Family, bought by a University of Oxford student and his mother (who represented her son in court) regarding his work at the Althorp Estate.
According to the case, the student had been working on and off at the Earl’s estate in Northampton during his Summer holidays, which is peak tourist season. According to the records, he had been working there for several years, both in school and university.
The student worked at the Estate’s East Gate, where he was tasked with checking visitors.
It was very clear in the judgment that he enjoyed his job. However, cracks appeared when he emailed management last August about non-payment of wages.
It turned out that the student had inadvertently provided his wrong bank details, but as the Estate’s financial officer was on holiday, his wages were pushed back.
As a consequence, his mother phoned the 8th Earl’s personal assistant (PA) about her son’s wages, which were immediately paid. Despite this, his mother exchanged “increasingly heated” emails asserting that her son was not able to take breaks.
According to the case, the student “was aware of his right to take rest breaks” and had done so throughout his time working on the gate.
The Estate’s legal team noted that “there was a clear shift system which had built-in rest breaks” and the claimant was arranging “breaks through his own telephone.”
The email exchanges in August culminated in his mother saying he would be resigning from the job.
Employment Judge Postle made it clear in his judgment it was “odd” the boy did not raise the issue he had not been receiving rest breaks in those couple of months leading up to his resignation.
He also noted that the claimant “was perfectly able to email” when his pay did not come through, even though it was because he had provided incorrect banking details.
The judge also noted that he “was not new at the job” giving the fact he had been working at the Estate since 2019, and “he would be familiar with staff and who to approach.”
“It would also appear that the other staff working in the Gate at the time had made arrangements for their break, whether full time, part time or casuals,” he added
He (his mother) took this to the Employment Tribunal, which was heard in Norwich earlier this year. His mother appeared for him while the Spencer Family had barrister Nigel Brokley.
The judge found that all of his claims were “quite simply” not well founded.
The judge even quipped on one of the claims that he already been paid £336 as a goodwill non-admission of liability gesture by the Spencer Family for the time he allegedly worked through rest breaks in any event.
