The Supreme Court has now confirmed that employers may treat split shifts as separate work periods under New Zealand employment law. This decision upholds Tranzurban’s approach and brings clarity to how rest and meal breaks apply for drivers working across extended periods with long breaks in between.
Understanding the Legal Context
Sections 69ZD to 69ZH of the Employment Relations Act 2000 outline the minimum rest and meal break entitlements for employees. These entitlements are determined based on the length of an employee’s work period, which is defined as the time from when an employee starts work until they finish, including any authorised breaks they are entitled to take.
Importantly, the way employment agreements are written plays a key role in how work periods are interpreted.
The Dispute
The Tramways Union brought a claim on behalf of drivers working split shifts for Tranzurban. The Union argued that an entire day, including the unpaid break in the middle, should count as a single work period. This would have increased the number of paid breaks drivers were entitled to.
Tranzurban disagreed, stating that the work before and after the long break (the split period) should be treated as two separate work periods. This position aligned with both their employment agreement and operational practices.
What the Courts Found
The Employment Court, the Court of Appeal, and ultimately the Supreme Court all agreed with Tranzurban’s position. The Court of Appeal decision provides the clearest summary of the reasoning:
- Tranzurban’s collective employment agreement specifically allowed for more than one work period in a shift.
- Drivers were not required to stay at work or perform any duties during the split period.
- The purpose of the break entitlements in the legislation is to ensure that workers remain rested, refreshed and nourished. The split period already allowed for this.
- If the entire day was treated as a single work period, it would create an unreasonable outcome by requiring additional breaks even during the unpaid break period.
- Tranzurban’s approach to breaks often provided more rest time than the minimum legal requirement.
The Supreme Court confirmed that this approach was consistent with the Employment Relations Act.
What This Means for Employers
This case confirms that split shifts can lawfully be treated as separate work periods, but only in certain circumstances. Employers relying on this structure must ensure that:
- Breaks provided meet or exceed the minimum requirements under the law
When to Be Cautious
Why This Case Matters
Although this decision involved public transport operators, the implications extend beyond the bus industry. Any employer using split shifts should carefully consider how their employment agreements are drafted and how shifts are structured.
Need Help?
At Gibson Sheat, we advise employers across a range of industries on how to stay compliant with employment law. If you need support reviewing your employment agreements, managing shift structures or ensuring your break entitlements align with legislation, we are here to help.
Craig Tatley is a Solicitor in our Litigation team, specialising in road transport law. He brings a unique perspective to his work through his regular experience driving as an urban bus driver in Wellington, giving him direct insight into the realities of the passenger transport sector.
Conor Lennon is a Senior Solicitor in our Employment team. He has represented clients before the Employment Relations Authority and regularly advises on a broad range of employment matters, including road transport and bus industry employment issues. Conor also has experience drafting employment agreements and advising on complex commercial transactions.
