ESM0516 - Guide to determining status: control - overview
In the 1950s the courts took the view that the distinction
between employment and self-employment turned on who controlled the
worker when carrying out his or her duties. If the engager had the
right of control then there was employment. Since then, this view
has developed and the control test is now considered to be less
significant in determining status. Although the right of control is
a significant factor in establishing whether someone is
self-employed or employed, that right is no longer held to be
conclusive on its own. It has to be considered in the light of all
the other factors relevant to employment status (see
ESM0515).
What we are concerned with is the right to control what the
worker has to do, where it has to be done, when it has to be done
and how it has to be done. It is the right to exert control that is
significant; not whether that right is exercised (see
ESM0518). In practice, the employer may
rarely (or never) exercise this right; particularly where the
worker is a skilled individual used to working on his or her own
initiative (see
ESM0527). It can be difficult to
demonstrate both that a right exists and that there is actual
control. The engager may not be able to exercise control over all
aspects of the work. If so, this does not necessarily mean that
there cannot be employment although the greater the level of
control there is, the stronger the pointer towards employment. You
must also bear in mind that the right of control is only one factor
to take into account and must be considered in context. The right
of an engager to exert control over a worker is a strong pointer
towards employment.
When investigating the status of a worker you need to
establish whether the engager has the right to control the worker.
The fact that the right exists carries a lot of weight even where
little control is exercised. For example, a manager may not closely
supervise the work of an experienced or skilled worker, although
the right exists.
Where there is evidence of little control this does not mean
conclusively that there is self-employment. However, where the
engager has no right of control whatsoever over the worker, there
will not be a contract of service (see the case of Ready Mixed
Concrete at
ESM7030). In general, the more control
that exists the more likely it is that the relationship between the
engager and the worker is that of employment.
It is important to consider the level of control in the
light of the overall picture presented by all relevant factors.
