European court rules that ambulance staff are covered by working time legislation
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
The European Court of Justice has given another far reaching ruling on the European Union抯 working time legislation that will have a direct impact on emergency medical services and on the implementation of the maximum 48 hour working week.
The judgment came in a case involving the German Red Cross, which operates a land-based rescue service using ambulances and other emergency medical vehicles.
Under a collective agreement the employees?average weekly working time, including at least three hours a day on duty during which the emergency workers have to be available at their place of employment and be ready to act immediately, was increased from 38.5 to 49 hours.
Some of the employees challenged the increase before a German court, insisting that their weekly working time should not exceed the 48 hours laid down in EU legislation. The court referred the case to the European judges for their advice.
The European court confirmed that the legislation covers emergency workers in attendance in ambulances as part of a rescue service, as their role is to provide initial medical treatment. In this regard their activities cannot be considered in the same way as services that are essential for the protection of public health or to respond to major catastrophes, which by their nature do not lend themselves to any working time planning and so are exempt from the 48 hour limit.
The judges also ruled that any exemption to this maximum period required all employees individually to give their consent, expressly and freely. A collective agreement permitting such an extension was not sufficient.
In line with previous judgments they confirmed that duty time at the place of employment must be considered in its totality as working time.
However, the validity of this interpretation is now being challenged by draft EU legislation tabled last month. This divides on-call time into "on-call time" and the "inactive part of on-call time"; only the first category counts towards the working week.
Endorsement by EU governments of the proposed clarification could force the European court to give a different interpretation in future.
Finally, the judges found that the EU working time legislation has "direct effect" as it is unconditional and sufficiently precise. In this respect individuals can rely on it in national courts if they believe national authorities are failing to implement the rules correctly.
Similarly, national courts must also take the legislation into account in proceedings between private parties to ensure that the maximum period of weekly working time is not exceeded.
Nothing has changed yet in Germany with regard to the German Red Cross case, but the German court will need to apply the interpretation given by the European Court. The effect of the ruling will be that employers who want employees, who are emergency ambulance workers, to work beyond the 48 hour limit, will need to get the consent of the individual worker, and that consent will have to be expressly and freely given.(Brussels Rory Watson)
The judgment came in a case involving the German Red Cross, which operates a land-based rescue service using ambulances and other emergency medical vehicles.
Under a collective agreement the employees?average weekly working time, including at least three hours a day on duty during which the emergency workers have to be available at their place of employment and be ready to act immediately, was increased from 38.5 to 49 hours.
Some of the employees challenged the increase before a German court, insisting that their weekly working time should not exceed the 48 hours laid down in EU legislation. The court referred the case to the European judges for their advice.
The European court confirmed that the legislation covers emergency workers in attendance in ambulances as part of a rescue service, as their role is to provide initial medical treatment. In this regard their activities cannot be considered in the same way as services that are essential for the protection of public health or to respond to major catastrophes, which by their nature do not lend themselves to any working time planning and so are exempt from the 48 hour limit.
The judges also ruled that any exemption to this maximum period required all employees individually to give their consent, expressly and freely. A collective agreement permitting such an extension was not sufficient.
In line with previous judgments they confirmed that duty time at the place of employment must be considered in its totality as working time.
However, the validity of this interpretation is now being challenged by draft EU legislation tabled last month. This divides on-call time into "on-call time" and the "inactive part of on-call time"; only the first category counts towards the working week.
Endorsement by EU governments of the proposed clarification could force the European court to give a different interpretation in future.
Finally, the judges found that the EU working time legislation has "direct effect" as it is unconditional and sufficiently precise. In this respect individuals can rely on it in national courts if they believe national authorities are failing to implement the rules correctly.
Similarly, national courts must also take the legislation into account in proceedings between private parties to ensure that the maximum period of weekly working time is not exceeded.
Nothing has changed yet in Germany with regard to the German Red Cross case, but the German court will need to apply the interpretation given by the European Court. The effect of the ruling will be that employers who want employees, who are emergency ambulance workers, to work beyond the 48 hour limit, will need to get the consent of the individual worker, and that consent will have to be expressly and freely given.(Brussels Rory Watson)