Stilgoe & Anor v UK Coal Mining Ltd.

Contractual working hours must be determined from the document read in its commercial and factual context. A reference to a “normal working week” does not necessarily impose a maximum number of hours. Where the contract also provides for flexible hours subject to operational needs, safety and reasonable rostering, those provisions may establish a non-contractual-hours basis of employment. The employer must nevertheless act reasonably, consult where required, give proper notice and distribute work equitably. The court may use business commonsense to resolve the construction, but cannot rely on prior negotiations or subjective intentions as interpretative background.

The claimants, officials employed by UK Coal Mining Ltd, sought a declaration concerning their contractual working hours. Their standard statements of terms incorporated relevant collective-agreement provisions, including flexible working, operational-needs rostering, shift changes and a reference to a normal 40-hour working week from Monday to Friday.

The claimants argued that 40 hours was the contractual maximum, subject only to exceptional additional work. The defendant contended that officials had to work the hours reasonably required by business needs, subject to safety and other contractual safeguards. The central issue was the proper construction of the incorporated contractual terms.

1. Judgment for the defendant. The references to a normal working week of 40 hours did not establish a maximum of 40 hours.
2. The contracts were to be interpreted by ascertaining the meaning they would convey to a reasonable person with the relevant background knowledge, applying the principles in Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 WLR 896. Business commonsense was relevant where a literal construction would produce an unreasonable commercial result.
3. The expression “normal” supplied a basic framework for employment. It did not override the wider provisions requiring working hours to respond to business operational needs and safety requirements. The references to flexibility, rostering, mobility and productivity therefore imposed an obligation to work hours needed to meet reasonable operational requirements.
4. The collective agreement restrained that obligation. Operational needs had to be reasonable; rostering was subject to consultation and equitable treatment; shift changes required notice; and complaints about unfair, unreasonable or unevenly distributed working time were subject to the grievance procedure. These provisions demonstrated that the parties had adopted a non-contractual-hours basis of employment, controlled by reasonableness and safety.
5. The statutory 48-hour limit under regulation 4(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 formed part of the commercial background, but did not convert the contractual reference to 40 hours into a contractual ceiling. Section 234 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 did not assist the construction.
6. Evidence of negotiations, drafts, questionnaires and post-contractual conduct was inadmissible or unnecessary for construction. The contractual wording and relevant background were sufficient.