Time off work

New and updated

• Type:

  FAQs

  What is the right to time off for dependants?

• Type:

  FAQs

  Who counts as a "dependant" for the purposes of the right to time off for dependants?

• Type:

  FAQs

  Under what circumstances are employees allowed time off work?

• Date:

  9 May 2003

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Time off for dependants: First consideration of dependants' leave entitlement

  In Qua v John Ford Morrison Solicitors, the EAT holds that the statutory right to take a "reasonable amount of time off" to care for dependants is a right that applies during working hours to enable employees to deal with the variety of specified unexpected or sudden events affecting their dependants, and in order to make any "necessary" longer-term arrangements for their care.

• Date:

  31 December 2002

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  MacCulloch & Wallis Ltd v Moore

  In MacCulloch & Wallis Ltd v Moore EAT/51/02, the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the right to time off for dependants is a right to be permitted a reasonable amount of time off to provide assistance or arrange for the provision of care if a dependant is taken ill or injured. The employee cannot extend that period unless there is clear evidence that further assistance or arrangements are required. Although what constitutes a reasonable amount of time off will vary depending on the circumstances, in most cases only one or two days will be needed to deal with the immediate issue and make any necessary longer-term arrangements.

• Type:

  Employment law cases

  Paid leave covers "aspects" of safety reps' functions

  In Rama v South West Trains, the High Court confirms that the test to determine safety representatives' entitlement to paid leave to attend health and safety training is not limited to training that is necessary to enable representatives to fulfil their functions.

• Date:

  1 October 1995

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Time off: Employer must be aware of request for time off

  An employee cannot complain that he or she has been refused time off for trade union duties unless it is established that a request for time off was made which came to the notice of the employer's appropriate representative, and that they either refused it, ignored it or failed to respond to it, holds the EAT in Ryford Ltd v Drinkwater.

• Date:

  1 April 1992

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Time off: Right to paid time off only during working hours

  In Hairsine v Kingston-upon-Hull City Council, the EAT holds that a trade union official's right to paid time off work for training is limited to those hours when the employee would normally be at work. If the training course falls outside those hours, the employee is not entitled to paid time off "in lieu" during his or her contractual working hours.

• Date:

  5 September 1990

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Time off: Parliamentary lobby not a trade union activity

  An industrial tribunal was entitled to find that, in the circumstances of this case, lobbying of Parliament was not a trade union activity entitling union members to time off.

• Date:

  24 January 1984

  Type:

  Employment law cases

  Time off: Relevance of agreed time off scheme

  In assessing the reasonableness of the amount of paid time off for trade union duties under s.27(2) of the EP(C)A, the terms of a collectively agreed time off scheme ought to be taken into account, suggests the EAT in Ashley v Ministry of Defence.