Under the Part Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000, part-time workers have the right not to be treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers because they are part-time, unless the treatment can be objectively justified.

In Augustine v Data Cars Ltd [2026], the Supreme Court confirmed that part-time status does not have to be the sole reason for the less favourable treatment. It is sufficient for the worker’s part-time status to be an effective cause of the treatment, meaning that it had a significant influence on the treatment complained of.

The facts

The case concerned a part-time private hire driver who was charged the same fixed weekly access fee to the employer’s booking system as full-time drivers. As he worked fewer hours, the fee represented a greater cost per hour for him than for a comparable full-time driver.

The decision

The Supreme Court held that applying the same arrangement to everyone could still amount to less favourable treatment where part-time status was an effective cause of the resulting disadvantage.

Key takeaways

Employers should review their pay arrangements, benefits, fees and workplace policies to identify whether apparently equal treatment could disadvantage part-time workers. Where appropriate, pay and benefits should be provided on a pro rata basis. Any difference in treatment must be capable of objective justification.

Not yet an NFU Employment Service member? Join today and take advantage of a host of guidance to support you navigating the complex world of employment law.

You'll also receive access to a wide range of member benefits – with discounts ranging from cars to health insurance.

For more information, call us on 0370 840 0234 or email us at [email protected]