Obligation to extend sick pay

Case 1: The facts

West Yorkshire Fire Authority's sick pay scheme gave employees the right to six months' full pay, after which pay could be reduced at the authority's discretion. Where the employee's absence was due to an illness or injury arising out of authorised duty, they were entitled to full pay for a year before the discretionary reduction.

Mr King was on long-term sick leave with depression. He claimed that his illness was work-related, and that the discretion to pay full pay should have been exercised. He also claimed that the authority should have taken into account the fact that his wife was also on long-term sick leave, so that financially they were worse off, and paid him an additional six months on half pay.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) noted that the extension of full pay beyond the first six months was discretionary, and that the authority had properly considered whether to exercise this discretion for King. The scheme was already generous, but a ruling in King's favour would mean that all "reasonable" employers would be expected to offer at least 12 months' full pay followed by six months' half pay.

It also noted that, if it accepted the argument regarding King's overall financial situation, every employer would be obliged to guarantee that employees were not worse off while sick. It noted that everyone on reduced long-term sick pay suffers financially.

West Yorkshire Fire and Civil Defence Authority v King UKEAT/0961/03