Guard wins work break victory

Unions say a strong message has been sent to the security industry

A Tyneside security guard has won a "groundbreaking" victory against his employers after claiming they would not let him go to the toilet at work.

Gavin Ruddick said he could not take any breaks during a 12-hour shift at an office block in Newcastle.

He claimed at an employment tribunal that the security industry should come under the provisions of the Working Time Directive, which lays down that regular breaks have to be taken.

The Newcastle tribunal decided that although the security industry was not subject to the law that requires workers to have a 20-minute break every six hours, it must do the "next best thing", such as allowing a number of shorter rest periods or one longer break.

Employers could be in breach of the Human Rights Act if they prevented workers going to the toilet.

The written decision of the tribunal said Mr Ruddick's quality of life had been "severely impaired".

I could not believe it when Gavin approached me and said he was doing a 12-hour shift without the right of any form of rest breaks

Joan Hoggins, GMB union

Mr Ruddick, who is employed by Reliance Security Services, complained to his managers in September 2001 that there was no official policy in place to allow him rest breaks to go to the toilet.

He said he was left in no doubt that if an incident occurred in which property was damaged while he was away from his post, he would be blamed.

Mr Ruddick, who works as a security guard at Zurich Financial Services offices in Newcastle said: "This is a fantastic decision for security workers.

"It is important that workers understand it is their legal right to have a rest and not a favour bestowed on them by their employer."

Fair treatment

Joan Hoggins of the GMB union, which supported Mr Ruddick, said: "This is a great result and will now send a clear message that the security industry does not fall outside the Working Time Directive and they must treat their workers fairly or pay the price.

"I could not believe it when Gavin approached me and said he was doing a 12-hour shift without the right of any form of rest breaks.

"This is a great success, not just for the region, but for security workers across the country."

Lawyers involved in the case described the decision as "groundbreaking" and said there will be one more tribunal hearing to determine the level of compensation.

Andrew Lightburn, of Thompsons solicitors who represented Mr Ruddick, said: "This is a very important decision for the security industry which believed it was exempt from the working time regulations with respect to rest breaks.

"This decision clarifies the law on this matter, giving all security guards on contracts requiring a permanent presence the right to some form of rest break."

No one was available to comment from Reliance Security Services.