Firefighter ruling sparks new heat for employers

The standby arrangements for Belgium’s volunteer firefighters are set to cause new headaches for employers with workers who are paid flat rates for time on-call or when sleeping in the workplace, with a judgement that will affect companies across the European Union.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that volunteer firefighter Rudy Matzak is a ‘worker’ and that within the meaning of the Working Time Directive his time on standby is ‘working’ time.

Under that Directive, ‘working time’ refers to “any period during which the worker is working, at the employer’s disposal and carrying out his activity or duties, in accordance with national laws and/or practice”. It applies to all sectors, including both public and private, and ‘rest period’ refers to any period not classed as working time.

When he was on call, Mr Matzak had to be at home and able to fulfil the requirement of an eight minute response time to reach the fire station, and the Court said that this obligation to remain “physically present at the place determined by the employer and the … constraints resulting from the need to reach his place of work within eight minutes” meant that he was limited in how he could pursue his personal and social life. This contrasted with a worker who may be asked simply to be contactable.

The knock-on effect for employers of standby time being deemed to be working time is that it has to be taken into account when complying with rest periods, working hours and the National Minimum Wage.

The judgement follows hard on the heels of last year’s hearing by the Employment Appeal Tribunal of three cases – Focus Care Agency Ltd v Roberts, Frudd v The Partington Group Ltd and Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake – which said that businesses must conduct a ‘multifactorial evaluation’ as there was no clear, hard and fast way to distinguish between on-call workers who are considered to be ‘at work’ and those who are not. In that judgement, the factors highlighted as likely to be a ‘working’ situation included whether an employee was on site to comply with a regulatory or contractual obligation, whether they would be disciplined for failing to remain on stand-by, and if they had to keep a listening ear and respond, and the extent to which they had to initiate action.

This latest judgement adds to the already complex minefield for compliance with on-call workers, it’s in Belgium, but as we are still part of the EU, it is just as important here.

Whether or not a worker on standby is ‘working’ will depend on the circumstances of each case, but the fact that the issue is complicated with grey areas does not mean that businesses can ignore it – ignorance of the law has never been a valid defence. Back-pay for up to six years could be due and that could mean substantial sums.

“For any situation that seems unclear, it’s worth getting some independent advice. An easily made change to the way that on-call systems are operated might clarify things and take an employee out of a potential ‘working’ situation.

In any situation where the on-call claim is found to be ‘working’ time the National Minimum Wage Regulations (NMW) will apply. The NMW Regulations apply to any eligible worker, whether or not they are paid by the hour and calculations must be made according to the payment basis, to check if the equivalent hourly rate is at the right amount. New rates for the National Minimum Wage come into force from April 2018, applicable to the various rates, including the National Living Wage for eligible workers aged over 25, and other age-related rates.

 

Year 25 and over 21 to 24 18 to 20 Under 18 Apprentice
 

April 2017

 

£7.83

 

£7.38

 

£5.90

 

£4.20

 

£3.70

 

Court of Justice of the European Union: Case C-518/15 Ville de Nivelles v Rudy Matzak

 

This is not legal advice; it is intended to provide information of general interest about current legal issues.

Share

Jane Crosby

Partner, Dispute Resolution

Jane is an employment and commercial litigation solicitor of more than 15 years' experience. Prior to entering the legal profession, Jane was employed in the...

Partner, Dispute Resolution

Jane Crosby

Jane is an employment and commercial litigation solicitor of more than 15 years' experience.

Prior to entering the legal profession, Jane was employed in the aviation industry. This experience is appreciated by many of Jane's clients who note that she is able to take a commercial and pragmatic approach to any legal issue that they face.

Jane acts for a wide range of individuals and businesses and her areas of specialism include aviation, property related industries and IT. Jane regularly advises on aspects of employment law, such as settlement agreements, employment contracts, policies and procedures, redundancies, equal pay, data protection, issues arising from TUPE and reorganisations, the calculation of holiday pay, bonus and commission payments, disciplinary and grievance issues, dismissal and termination issues, the protection of confidential information and the enforcement of restrictive covenants. Jane gets involved in GDPR training for her clients and she is able to deliver tailored employment law training sessions upon request.

As a commercial litigation lawyer, Jane also deals in shareholder and directors disputes, commercial contract disputes and the enforcement of restrictive covenants.

Jane has been involved in successful high value commercial litigation for clients in the High Courts, she is an accredited mediator and she is a member of the Employment Lawyers Association.

Jane is often asked to write for a number of well known publications, including The Daily Mail, The Telegraph and The Week and she has been interviewed on BBC Radio 4.

Here is small selection of the feedback that Jane has received:

“Jane, I cannot sincerely thank you enough for your wise counsel and am delighted to have made your acquaintance. If I am blessed with a new position somewhere I will hand over my contract in the first instance to you. Likewise, any of my friends, peers, romans and countrymen wanting advice, I will point them in your direction.”

“Jane, you have been most resilient on my behalf for which I sincerely thank you for all your endeavours. I have a tremendous working relationship with Hart Brown and you have undoubtedly compounded this further."

“I appreciated the clarity of advice given at a stressful time”.

“A sensitive and highly professional approach and efficient work in the interests of the client”.

“Your advice, conduct and assistance have been indeed outstanding and very professional but also – and most importantly – very humane”.

Head Office

Resolution House
Riverview
Walnut Tree Close
Guildford
Surrey
GU1 4UX

Your Local Office

Guildford - 01483 887766
Cobham - 01932 576789
Cranleigh - 01483 887515
Godalming - 01483 887766
Woking - 01483 887766

Hart Brown Solicitors is the trading name of Hart Brown LLP registered in England and Wales No. OC 425835 whose registered office is Resolution House, Riverview, Walnut Tree Close, Guildford, GU1 4UX and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) No. 658593. Members: N Maud, T Pearce, D Knapp, R Campbell and P Grimwood, Partners: J Crosby, L Harrhy, J Jupp, J Lamont, T Mandelli, V McMurtrie, E Moore, S Osborne, S Powell and G Sanders.

Any reference to a partner in relation to Hart Brown LLP means a member or an employee with the title of Partner of Hart Brown LLP.

© Copyright Hart Brown LLP 2019 - All Rights Reserved. VAT registration no. 211372705