header-logo header-logo

20 September 2011
Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Interrupted breaks allowed

Employers can ask staff to remain on call during breaks rules Court of Appeal

Employers who ask security staff to remain on call during rest breaks do not breach the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833) (WTR), the Court of Appeal has held.

Under reg 24 of the WTR, security guards are exempt from the entitlement to a rest break when working longer than six hours as long as they are given “an equivalent period of compensatory rest” or other appropriate protection to protect their health and safety.

In Hughes v The Corps of Commissionaires Management Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1061, however, a security guard, who worked 12-hour shifts at Orange in Croydon, questioned whether his break conditions complied with the WTR. The guard remained on call during his breaks. If interrupted, he was permitted to start his break again.

An earlier case, Gallagher v Alpha Catering Service [2004] EWCA Civ 1559, [2004] All ER (D) 121 (Nov) held that an interrupted break should be taken at another time.

However, the court held there was no WTR breach, and that a re-started rest break is more beneficial than a Gallagher break taken on a later shift.

Delivering judgment, Lord Justice Elias said: “The natural meaning of ‘equivalent period of compensatory leave’ is that a break of the same length and the same nature should be provided, although at some alternative time, to make up for the right lost.

“But adopting that construction could frustrate the health and safety objective which the legislation is designed to achieve. Take this case: in practice the period of rest, in the sense of freedom from work activities, could be very significant since the break starts again if the rest is subject to interruption. This is far preferable to an arrangement whereby the appellant were given an additional Gallagher break on a later shift, even if that were otherwise possible.”

Makbool Javaid, partner in charge of employment at Simons Muirhead & Burton, which represented the Corps of Commissionaires, said: “This is a precedent case that establishes the law concerning a worker’s entitlement to rest breaks at single manned sites and represents a common sense approach for employers.”

Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll