header-logo header-logo

No limits?

01 February 2007 / Tess Gill
Issue: 7258 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Tess Gill considers the effects of recent rulings
on call-out time in the working week

The limits on the working week in the Working Time Directive 2003/88/EC (the Directive), previously Directive 93/104/EC, have always been controversial; especially with the UK government in favour of an individual opt-out of the maximum 48-hour working limit, which has been consistently opposed by trade unions.

Opting out

The Directive is implemented domestically by the Working Time Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/1833) (the regulations), as amended. The main provisions follow those of the Directive (see box, p 158). The opt-out favoured by the government refers to Art 22 of the Directive (see reg 4) which permits an employer to require a worker to work more than 48 hours for each seven day period over the reference period of 17 weeks—or over 52 weeks through a collective or workplace agreement—though only if the employer has first obtained the worker’s agreement.

The UK is the only member state to make wide use of the individual opt-out. In other member states companies’ use of the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
back-to-top-scroll