On call-duty of medical Professionals – Changing the Paradigm of its Assessment as a Results of new Decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Background: New court decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union change the paradigm of assessing on-call duty outside the workplace for healthcare workers so that it can be considered working time in certain circumstances despite the current wording of Section 96 of the Labor Code. The transposition of the conclusions of certain court decisions into the Labor Code would significantly contribute to the improvement of the working and wage conditions of healthcare workers. Objectives: The primary goal of the paper is to identify, thoroughly assess, and organize the fundamental theoretical and legal principles behind the judgments rendered by the Court of Justice of the European Union, along with decisions from national courts concerning the concept of working hours, particularly on-call duty. This objective aimed to highlight a potential shift in how working time is evaluated. Methodology: We conducted a search and retrieved national and European court decisions, encompassing 43 judgments from the Court of Justice of the European Union and 22 from national courts. This process involved using the CURIA system, as well as the search systems provided by the Ministry of Justice in both Slovakia and the Czech Republic, including commercial databases housing court decisions and legal rulings (APSI, Judikaty.info) Results: We identified two categories of Court of Justice of the European Union rulings, which were subsequently mirrored in national court decisions. Both sets of decisions examined the evaluation of on-call duty (employee staying outside the workplace), but they diverged in their interpretation of whether it qualified as working time. If an employer mandated that an employee on on-call duty (staying outside the workplace) must be ready to report to work within a specific timeframe (e.g., 20 minutes) if required for work duties, this represents a limitation on the employee’s freedom to manage their leisure time to such an extent that this period could be considered part of the employee’s working hours. Conclusion: Based on recent judicial decisions by the Court of Justice of the European Union, it can be inferred that Section 96 of the Labor Code, which does not categorize on-call duty if an employee stays outside the workplace as working time, contradicts Directive no. 2003/88/EC. Given a comprehensive examination of the case’s circumstances and an evaluation of the impact on the employee’s off-duty rest periods, if the employee is deprived of the autonomy to manage their leisure time at their own discretion due to the employer’s specific instructions during off-site on-call duty, this time period may also qualify as working time.