9.05.2018

Break-ing News

There has been a lot of comment in recent months about changes to rest and meal break entitlements.  Based on those comments, one could be forgiven for thinking the world was ending.  Take one union as an example: they described the changes as nothing less than a “radical attack” on the rights of Kiwi workers.

Stripping away the rhetoric, this is what has happened: as of 6 March 2015, the Employment Relations Act 2000 was amended.  There were a number of changes made, including to rest and meal breaks.  Before this date, the law was prescriptive: employees were entitled to a set number of breaks for specified durations depending on the number of hours worked.

What we have now is more flexibility, as there is no longer any prescribed number or duration of breaks.  Instead, the obligation on an employer is now to provide rest and meal breaks that provide a reasonable opportunity during an employee’s work period for rest, refreshment, and attention to personal matters, and which are appropriate for the duration of an employee’s work period.

In short, this means that breaks are to be taken at the times and for the durations agreed between employer and employee.  If they cannot agree, then an employer may specify reasonable times and durations for breaks that enable it to maintain continuity of service or production.  But note that an employer must provide a reasonable opportunity to negotiate in good faith and agree the timing and duration of breaks before purporting to impose them on employees.

Something that is new is that rest and meal breaks may now be subject to restrictions.  However, the circumstances in which this can occur are limited, as the restrictions must be:

  • reasonable and necessary having regard to the nature of an employee’s work; or
  • reasonable and agreed to by employer and employee (whether in the employment agreement or otherwise).

In addition, any restrictions must relate to the employee being required to continue doing work during what would otherwise be their break (for example, being available to answer a phone call or customer enquiry during a break)

Where breaks cannot reasonably be provided, or where an employer and employee agree not to take breaks, they can be replaced by reasonable compensatory measures.  Examples may include additional payments, allowing later start times, allowing earlier finish times, and granting time off work equivalent to the length of the break.

As always, employers need to be somewhat cautious.  Existing rest and meal break provisions in employment agreements continue to apply unless they are varied by the parties.  So if you have an employee with specified breaks in their agreement, they will be entitled to those breaks unless you agree to vary them.  Some employees will welcome the change and flexibility, others will not.

Above all else, the key thing to note is that, despite these changes, employees do remain entitled to breaks.  The changes have not taken them away completely as some have alleged.  Furthermore, rest breaks remain paid breaks.  Nevertheless, now might be a good time to review your employment agreements in light of the changes.

If you have any questions or want further information about the rest and meal break changes feel free to give us a call.

Do you need expert legal advice?
Contact the expert team at Hesketh Henry.
Kerry_100x100 1
Media contact - Kerry Browne
Please contact Kerry with any media enquiries and with any questions related to marketing or sponsorships on +64 9 375 8747 or via email.

Related Articles / Insights & Opinion

So long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, goodbye…
When the employment relationship comes to an end, for whatever reason, there are still a few boxes to be ticked. So what needs to be done before you can bid each other a (hopefully) fond farewell?
5.11.2018 Posted in Employment Law
WorkSafe v Athenberry Holdings Ltd: The Competent Contractor?
Defining health and safety duties in a contracting situation is rarely straightforward.
1.11.2018 Posted in Health & Safety Law
Managing Partner Honoured with German Award
Erich Bachmann, the Managing Partner of Auckland based commercial law firm Hesketh Henry, has been awarded the Cross of the Order of Merit with Ribbon of the Federal Republic of Germany (Verdienstkreu...
30.10.2018
Building and Construction Law Journal
Construction partner, Nick Gillies, has been published in the latest Building and Construction Law Journal ((2018) 34 BCL 179).
18.10.2018 Posted in Construction Law
EBERT CONSTRUCTION: RECEIVERSHIP AND LIQUIDATION
Introduction Following our Initial Note, the receivers of Ebert Construction Ltd (Ebert) released their first report on 1 October 2018.  Then, on 3 October 2018, Ebert put itself into liquidation, wi...
Pruning Back Liability: Do Contractual Arrangements Hold the Key?
The first defended hearing under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA), WorkSafe v Athenberry Holdings Ltd, required the District Court to consider the ability of a business (a PCBU) to influe...
9.10.2018 Posted in Health & Safety Law
Negotiating The Best Incentives For Korean Companies
Hesketh Henry Special Counsel, Hak Jun Lee  recently presented at the 2018 IAKL conference on “ Negotiating the best incentives for Korean companies “. The topic included:  Current trends f...
9.10.2018 Posted in Foreign Investment
Send us an enquiry
For expert legal advice, please complete the form below or call us on (09) 375 8700.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.