header-logo header-logo

24 October 2012
Issue: 7535 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

BA pilots are flying high

Supreme Court: holidaying pilots to be paid supplements

British Airways pilots’ holiday pay must include their “flying pay supplement” and “time away from base” allowance as well as their basic salary, the Supreme Court has held.

The case, BA plc v Williams and Ors [2012] UKSC 43, will affect thousands of similar claims brought by BA crew and hundreds of claims brought by staff at other airlines.

It concerned whether the payment of basic salary only to pilots on annual leave is in breach of reg 4 of the Civil Aviation (Working Time) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/756). Under their terms of agreement, pilots receive a basic salary plus a “flying pay supplement” of £10 per hour spent flying, and a “time away from base” allowance of £2.73 per hour, but only basic salary while on holiday.

BA argued there was a need for legal certainty, and that the Aviation Regulations were too “unspecific” to give effect to the Aviation Directive.

The Supreme Court referred the case to the European Court of Justice, which held that a pilot on annual leave was entitled “not only to the maintenance of his basic salary, but also, first, to all the components intrinsically linked to the performance of the tasks which he is required to carry out under his contract of employment and in respect of which a monetary amount, included in the calculation of his total remuneration, is provided”.

Delivering his judgment, Lord Mance rejected BA’s arguments and remitted the claims in respect to the two supplementary allowances to an employment tribunal.

Jim McAuslan, general secretary of the British Airline Pilots Association, says the case “sets a benchmark across the whole of the aviation industry”.

“We always believed that under European working time rules introduced in 2004 pilots should be treated like other working people in the UK and should receive their proper pay during holidays. This should not be restricted to basic salary but should include allowances.”

Issue: 7535 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll