Entrepreneur sacked by agency she based after taking luxurious working holidays in Bali and Australia ‘as and when she desired’ wins £50,000 payout

A glamorous entrepreneur has won over £50k in compensation after she was criticised for taking working holidays to Bali and Australia while in charge of her own beauty company.

Hayley Harvey-Smith, who founded a successful beauty school, came under fire over her month-long stay in Bali and Australia as well as trips to Paris and high-end ski resort Val d’Isère in France.

The businesswoman, who earned up to £220,000 a year, could take leave ‘as and when she desired’ as she was director and she told a tribunal she worked while abroad.

Mrs Harvey-Smith, 40, did not face any flack at the time of the trips, but when she sold her shares months later the new business owner criticised her over them and sacked her in a ‘sham’ redundancy.

The new owner, ex-bookkeeper Mark Thompson, 50, argued if Mrs Harvey-Smith was a ‘true employee’ she would have been disciplined for ‘the manner in which she took annual leave or worked from abroad’.

But, an employment tribunal in Scotland found that apart from the Val d’Isère visit, all of the trips were working holidays and Mrs Harvey-Smith did not breach any employment rules.

Mrs Harvey-Smith has now won £51,293 in compensation after suing GlamCandy UK for unfair dismissal and accrued but unpaid holiday.

The employment tribunal, held in Edinburgh, heard Mrs Harvey-Smith and her sister in law founded the business GlamCandy in 2011 but she went on to have sole control over it.

The company, which started in Edinburgh, is a makeup school which offers accredited courses across the UK in makeup artistry.

Mrs Harvey-Smith’s primary duties and responsibilities related to marketing and she was regarded at the ‘boss’ and ‘master’ of the beauty business.

Among other roles, she helped develop the education centres, ran social media, and sourced items for the makeup kits.

It was heard Mrs Harvey-Smith, who had invested her own money into the business, was the ‘most senior’ person in the beauty business and in the absence of a board, did not report to anyone.

And, while her contract outlined set hours of work, Mrs Harvey-Smith often worked ‘in excess’ of these, often starting as early as 5am and working late into the evenings, as well as weekends.

The tribunal heard the entrepreneur was entitled to take 25 days annual leave as per her contract but ultimately took time off ‘as and when she desired’, often working while abroad.

On January 22 of 2023, the business owner took a month long trip to Bali and Australia – but spent much of that time working.

A tribunal report said: ‘An area of dispute was a lengthy trip [she] took to Bali and Australia in January and February 2023 with [Mrs Harvey-Smith] asserting she was working while abroad.

‘Her evidence was that when she was in Bali and Australia she was undertaking marketing tasks, scheduling ads, linking these with the website, writing and editing stories for Instagram.’

In March 2023 she went on holiday to Val d’Isere, France, and the following month she went on a work trip to Paris.

By the summer of last year, the business was experiencing ‘financial distress’ so in June 2023, she sold her shares of the business to Mr Thompson, an accountant who worked with the firm for many years.

As part of the exchange, she resigned from her office of director but continued to undertake work as usual with the business, it was heard.

The tribunal noted that there was ‘no noticeable change’ in the work done by Mrs Harvey-Smith, and Mr Thompson did not assume the role of managing director.

Out of the blue, on December 4 last year, Mr Thompson’s newly appointed director sent Mrs Harvey-Smith a letter with the heading ‘notice of redundancy’.

Employment Judge Eleanor Mannion said this letter set out a ‘false narrative’ relating to redundancy in which due process was not followed.

‘A genuine redundancy scenario did not exist,’ the judge said.

It was heard that the redundancy and notice payments referred to in the letter were not paid to Mrs Harvey-Smith and her sacking was made ‘without any input or consultation’ from the entrepreneur.

And, Mrs Harvey-Smith tried to appeal this decision – but GlamCandy bosses did not organise a hearing so she ultimately lost her ‘right of appeal’.

Mrs Harvey-Smith sued GlamCandy for unfair dismissal.

During the hearing, Mr Thompson tried to argue that Mrs Harvey-Smith was ‘not acting as an employee would have’ in relation to her annual leave but this was heavily disputed by the entrepreneur.

He said that he was not able to ‘discipline’ her because of a ‘lack of control over her’.

It was argued that Mrs Harvey-Smith, who was involved in other businesses, had breached a clause in her ‘handbook’ called ‘moonlighting’, which stated employees are not allowed to work for company’s which compete with GlamCandy.

But, this was dismissed by the judge, who said the handbook is a contractual document and Mrs Harvey-Smith did not work ‘in contravention’ with this.

The panel noted an ‘area of dispute’ regarding the Bali and Australia trip and accepted that ‘this was a working trip rather than annual leave’.

The tribunal accepted Mrs Harvey-Smith’s evidence and ruled that she did not take time ‘in excess of her annual leave entitlement in 2023’.

Upholding her claims, Judge Mannion said Mrs Harvey-Smith lost her job in a ‘sham redundancy’.

‘There was no genuine redundancy situation, a redundancy consultation or process had not been followed and [Mrs Harvey-Smith] had not been fairly selected for redundancy,’ the judge said.

‘In the absence of a fair reason for dismissal, I find that [Mrs Harvey-Smith’s] dismissal on 4 December 2023 was unfair in law.’

Mrs Harvey-Smith is now involved with other businesses. 

GlamCandy UK told MailOnline the company is planning to lodge an appeal against the decision. 

MailOnline has approached Mrs Harvey-Smith for comment.