Buddy says: In Sanderson & another v Exel Management Services Ltd [2006], the EAT held that those who were not employed for a "fixed number of hours", therefore did not have "normal working hours" for the purposes of sections 221-229 ERA 1996.

Employer information: The EAT considered the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Bamsey v Albion Engineering and Manufacturing plc [2004] and held that the issue under section 234 was whether the claimants were employed for "a fixed number of hours in a week or other period".

It rejected the argument that "a fixed number of hours" could be read as including notional hours, or "any other period which is a genuine pre-estimate" of the actual hours worked. In any event, the EAT noted that the latter formulation would not assist the Respondent because the number of production hours was (in some cases) no longer a genuine pre-estimate.

The point in this case is a narrow one, but has the potential to substantially alter the amount of holiday pay to which a worker is entitled under the Working Time Regulations. The calculation of a week's pay for workers with "normal working hours" (whether or not their pay varies according to work done or the timing of shifts) will exclude any sums earned outside those normal working hours, such as voluntary overtime.