Blair & Ors v Hotel Solutions London Ltd [2012]
Published on: 02/03/2012
Article Authors
The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Background
The claimants were cleaners in a hotel and said they could not complete the required work in cleaning 15 rooms in the time allocated without working through their breaks. The employer argued that none of the cleaners was actually required to work overtime - they could let them 75know the job couldn't be finished and could go home. They had the option to stay behind and finish the work but this was voluntary. The employees argued they were pressurised into working during breaks to get through the work and it was impossible to clean the rooms without working reduced breaks or staying behind after allocated hours.There was a union agreement which stated in paragraph 3.01 that “Overtime is voluntary, but due to the nature of the business, employees may be required to work overtime at short notice and their co-operation in this matter is necessary.” The EAT stated that the correct construction of this clause was that there was a requirement for the employer to provide notice of any overtime and the employees could then decide whether to undertake that work. The employees, felt the EAT, were trying to turn a requirement for co-operation into a contractual right to overtime.The EAT has held that the overtime was voluntary and no payment was due, therefore no unlawful deduction from wages took place. http://bit.ly/zUH873
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Already a subscriber?
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial
Disclaimer
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.
This article is correct at 02/03/2012
Recent Case Law
Abel Estate Agent Ltd v Reynolds [2025]
04/02/2025
Eddie Stobart Ltd v Graham [2025]
04/02/2025
Hassard v Department for the Economy [2025]
30/01/2025
Bouliach v Rana & Dee Indian Limited [2025]
30/01/2025
Morais v Ryanair DAC [2025]
21/01/2025
Q&A
How to handle it
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you
Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users.
Learn more →