Working time is defined in the Working Environment Act as the time during which the employee is at the employer’s disposal.
The Thue case
In 2018, the Supreme Court issued a ruling (the so-called Thue case) stating that travel time could be considered working time under certain criteria. The case concerned whether a police officer’s travel to a different reporting location than his regular workplace constituted working time, and it was based on an opinion from the EFTA Court. However, the judgment created some uncertainty about how transferable this interpretation would be to other employees travelling on assignments for their employer. This led to strong disagreement between employers and employee organisations regarding whether travel time should be regarded as working time.
The Coca-Cola ruling
In 2020, the “Coca-Cola ruling” addressed service employees working for Coca-Cola Norway who had no fixed reporting location and travelled directly from home to different customers each day. The Eidsivating Court of Appeal concluded that the journey from home to the first customer should be considered working time under certain conditions. However, the court did not provide a clear answer on how such time should be compensated.
EFTA Court in 2021
In an advisory opinion from 2021, the EFTA Court clarified several points that employers and employee organisations in Norway had disagreed on since the Thue case in 2018. The case concerned an Icelandic aircraft mechanic employed by the state, who occasionally carried out inspections of aircraft abroad to approve them for flights into Iceland. The mechanic travelled by plane to and from these foreign assignments. The question before the EFTA Court was whether travel time beyond the normal working day for these assignments constituted working time.
The Court concluded that necessary travel time is working time, regardless of whether the travel occurs outside normal working hours and regardless of whether the employee performs work or can be contacted during the journey. The fact that the employee cannot be contacted is a consequence of the travel arrangements chosen by the employer. The decisive factor is that the employee cannot freely remove themselves from the work environment and engage in their own interests freely and without interruption.
Finally, the Court stated that it is irrelevant whether travel to a location other than the employee’s regular reporting place takes place within the EEA or to/from third countries, as long as the employment contract is established under and governed by national legislation in an EEA state.
Summary: Travel time is working time!
Based on this opinion, Tekna now believes there is no doubt that travel time should be calculated as working time on a 1:1 basis. There is still some uncertainty regarding how this should be compensated beyond the fact that the hours must be counted one-to-one. We therefore recommend that our members contact either their workplace representative or Tekna’s legal department for advice on challenges related to these issues.
