New Zealand Tramways & Public Passenger Transport Employees’ Union Wellington Branch Inc v Tranzurban Hutt Valley Ltd - [2025] NZCA 1
Date of Judgment
04 February 2025
Decision
Summary
Employment law - Rest and meal break entitlements - Work period.
The appeal is dismissed.
The question of law is answered as follows: Did the Employment Court err in its interpretation of s 69ZC of the Employment Relations Act 2000? No.
Many public bus drivers employed by Tranzurban Hutt Valley Ltd are rostered to work for a period in the morning and a period in the afternoon, with a time in the middle of the day where they are not rostered to work. This arrangement is commonly known as a "split shift" and reflects the demand pattern for public buses.
Issue: Whether a split shift involves two discrete work periods or one work period for the purposes of the worker's entitlements to rest and meal breaks under the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act).
Held: There is nothing in the words of s 69ZC of the Act to preclude more than one work period in a day. The start and end of a work period are determined with reference to the employee's terms and conditions of employment. The rest and meal break entitlements under s 69ZD contemplate entitlements based on a continuous period of work during which the employee is working or on a rest or meal break or other authorised break. Whether a split shift involves a continuous work period or two separate work periods depends on a factual assessment. Tranzurban's approach to split shifts, which treats split shifts with a middle period of two or more hours as separate work periods, is consistent with the purposes of the rest and meal break provisions and the terms of the collective agreement.
The appeal is dismissed.
The question of law is answered as follows: Did the Employment Court err in its interpretation of s 69ZC of the Employment Relations Act 2000? No.
Many public bus drivers employed by Tranzurban Hutt Valley Ltd are rostered to work for a period in the morning and a period in the afternoon, with a time in the middle of the day where they are not rostered to work. This arrangement is commonly known as a "split shift" and reflects the demand pattern for public buses.
Issue: Whether a split shift involves two discrete work periods or one work period for the purposes of the worker's entitlements to rest and meal breaks under the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act).
Held: There is nothing in the words of s 69ZC of the Act to preclude more than one work period in a day. The start and end of a work period are determined with reference to the employee's terms and conditions of employment. The rest and meal break entitlements under s 69ZD contemplate entitlements based on a continuous period of work during which the employee is working or on a rest or meal break or other authorised break. Whether a split shift involves a continuous work period or two separate work periods depends on a factual assessment. Tranzurban's approach to split shifts, which treats split shifts with a middle period of two or more hours as separate work periods, is consistent with the purposes of the rest and meal break provisions and the terms of the collective agreement.