Working time
In Smith v AJ Morrisroes & Sons Ltd and other appeals, the EAT holds that the guidelines set out by the EAT in Marshalls Clay require that "there must be mutual agreement for genuine payment for holidays, representing a true addition to the contractual rate of pay for time worked."
In Pfeiffer and others v Deutsches Rotes Kreuz, Kreisverband Waldshut eV, the European Court of Justice held that the exclusion of 'road transport' from the provisions of the Working Time Directive did not cover emergency workers, even when they used a road vehicle and accompanied patients on their journeys to hospital.
In Gallagher and others v Alpha Catering Services Ltd, the Court of Appeal holds that, for the purposes of reg. 21(c) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, it is the worker's activities, not the activities of the employer's business, that are relevant when considering the need for continuity of service or production.
In Clamp v Aerial Systems, the EAT holds that, in a case where the applicant withdrew his consent to opt out of the maximum 48-hour week set by the Working Time Regulations 1998, the applicant had not suffered a detriment within the meaning of s.45A of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
In Merino Gomez v Continental Industrias del Caucho SA, the European Court of Justice holds that pregnant workers have a dual entitlement to annual leave and maternity leave: pregnant workers must be able to take their annual leave during a period other than their period of maternity leave.
In Bamsey and others v Albon Engineering & Manufacturing plc [2004] IRLR 457 CA, the Court of Appeal held that where overtime hours have been worked during the 12-week period immediately preceding the date on which a worker's holiday begins only those hours that the employer is contractually required to provide and the worker contractually required to work count as normal working hours for the purposes of determining the amount of a week's pay.
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: on-call hours; and statutory sick pay.
In Evans v Malley Organisation Ltd t/a First Business Support the Court of Appeal holds that an employee who was paid a basic salary, plus commission which depended on contracts he won for his employer, was entitled, on termination of his employment, to accrued statutory holiday pay calculated by reference to his basic pay alone, and not his average pay including commission.
In Hill v Chapell, the EAT holds that there was no "overpayment" of holiday pay or of wages in circumstances where an employee was entitled, under the Working Time Regulations 1998, to 20 days' paid holiday per annum, and had taken 15 days' paid holiday by agreement with her employer during her six months of employment.
In Addison & Addison (t/a Brayton News) v Ashby, the EAT holds that a 15-year-old "paper boy" is not a "worker" for the purposes of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and so is not entitled to four weeks' paid annual leave under the Regulations.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to working time.