CLARIFYING DRIVER RIGHTS TO CHOOSE REST LOCATIONS AND EMPLOYERS' RESPONSIBILITY

SUMMARY ON OUR ARTICLE ABOUT CJEU DECISION :

On 4 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) struck down a key provision of the Mobility Package that required trucks to return to base every eight weeks. This decision marks a turning point in the debate on transport regulations and workers’ rights in Europe, highlighting the tensions between Western and Central and Eastern European countries.

Adopted in 2020, the Mobility Package aimed to improve working conditions for lorry drivers and combat unfair competition. Although supported by Western European countries, these measures were seen by Eastern European countries as protectionist barriers favouring Western companies. Several of these nations, including Lithuania, Poland and Hungary, had challenged the requirement, arguing that it imposed high costs on their transport companies.

The CJEU found that there was no proportionate justification for the return obligation, which spares Eastern companies operating costs. The Court did, however, uphold other rules in the Mobility Package, notably on cabotage and the use of intelligent tachographs, but the annulment of the return rule eases the burden on Eastern European hauliers and reduces unnecessary emissions.

THE EU COURT UPHOLDS CORE PRINCIPLES OF REGULATION 2020/1054

Regulation 2020/1054 has brought about significant changes in the organization of work within the transport sector, particularly concerning drivers’ weekly rest periods. Despite the legal challenges to some of its provisions, the Court’s ruling has upheld the regulation’s core principles. It provides clarity on the freedom of drivers to choose their rest locations and confirms the responsibility of employers to facilitate those choices, while also ensuring operational flexibility. This decision will have lasting implications for the transport industry, requiring employers to carefully balance their operational needs with the legal driver rights.

These challenges centered primarily on the belief that the regulation imposed undue restrictions on transport undertakings and drivers. However, the Court ultimately rejected these claims in their entirety.

Court Rulings on Regulation 2020/1054: Ensuring Driver Rights and Freedom of Choice

The CJUE found that Regulation 2020/1054 guarantees drivers the freedom to decide where to take their rest periods. In the point 562, the CJUE point out that

« Furthermore, point 6(d) of Article 1 of Regulation 2020/1054 specifically seeks to alleviate the difficulty referred to in paragraph 552 above by requiring employers to organise the work of drivers in such a way that they are able, if they so wish, to return every three or four weeks, as the case may be, to the operational centre of their employer or to their place of residence. »

In this context, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJUE) emphasizes the importance of supporting drivers’ well-being through Regulation 2020/1054. Specifically, by mandating that employers arrange drivers’ work schedules to allow for regular returns to their operational base or home every three to four weeks, the regulation addresses the challenges highlighted in previous points. This provision reflects a commitment to enhancing the working conditions for drivers, ensuring they have the opportunity for adequate rest and personal time, but not the obligation to full fil.

Furthermore, it can be observed that the CJEU highlights that “the Advocate General noted in point 126 of his Opinion that point 6(d) of Article 1 of Regulation 2020/1054 imposes an obligation on transport undertakings to organise drivers’ work in such a way that, as employers, they enable, using all available means within the context of their employment relationship with drivers, the return of those drivers during working hours to one of the two locations specified in that provision—namely, the employer’s operational centre or the driver’s place of residence. This obligation, moreover, is limited to one of these two locations only and does not extend to other places.

The obligation referred to in the preceding paragraph is, however, without prejudice to the driver’s freedom to choose to take his or her regular or compensatory weekly rest period at the place where he or she wishes to do so.

« Point 6(d) of Article 1 of Regulation 2020/1054 does not impose any obligation on drivers as regards the place where their regular or compensatory weekly rest period is taken.

In particular, although, as recital 8 of Regulation 2020/1055 confirms, that provision guarantees drivers the ‘right’ to return to one of the two specific places referred to therein in order to begin or spend that rest period, it does not impose any obligation on them in that regard.

It does not therefore provide that drivers are required, in all circumstances, to return to the employer’s operational centre or to their place of residence, leaving them free to choose to take their regular or compensatory weekly rest period at the place where they so wish. »

The CJEU clarifies in point 172 that :

« The scope to be attributed to the obligation laid down in point 6(d) of Article 1 of Regulation 2020/1054 is, moreover, confirmed by recital 14 of that regulation, which states that, in order to prevent drivers from remaining away from their place of residence for an excessively long period, transport undertakings must organise drivers’ work in such a way as to ‘enable’ them to reach the employer’s operational centre or their place of residence, as the case may be, every three or four weeks, while expressly stating that drivers are ‘free to choose where to spend their rest period’. »

In point 173, the CJEU explains that while Regulation 2020/1054, Article 1, point 6(d), allows drivers the freedom to choose where to take their regular or compensatory weekly rest, the EU legislature’s primary intent is to ensure that drivers feel no undue pressure to avoid returning to the employer’s operational center or their residence.

The social impact assessment (Part 1/2, p. 49) highlighted the difficulty for drivers in proving their choice was genuinely free, especially when opting to rest in their vehicles.

The Court’s ruling focused on two major misinterpretations of the contested provision :

Misinterpretation of the return driver rights / obligation : Some Member States argued that point 6(d) required drivers to return exclusively to the operational centre of their employer or their place of residence using empty heavy goods vehicles.

However, the CJEU clarified that drivers have the freedom to choose where they wish to take their weekly rest periods. They can choose any location, including the employer’s operational centre or their place of residence.

The regulation does not force transport undertakings to require drivers to take their rest periods at a specific location, but rather obliges undertakings to organise work in such a way that drivers can return to the place of their choosing to start or spend their rest period.

Protection of workers’ and driver rights: The CJEU emphasized that the EU legislature aimed to protect workers, that the EU created this rule to protect drivers, who have less power in the employment relationship.

Employers cannot exempt themselves from the obligation to organise work in a way that facilitates drivers’ return, even if the driver has previously waived their right to return in general terms.

Employer responsibilities : The CJEU also noted that the EU legislature wanted to give transport companies some flexibility in how they fulfill the return requirement. While employers must make sure that drivers can return to their chosen location to start their rest period, the regulation allows flexibility in how this return is arranged.

This flexibility is meant to accommodate varying operational needs and situations, giving employers the ability to determine the most appropriate arrangements for their specific circumstances.

Conclusion – freedom of choice

The CJEU’s interpretation of Regulation 2020/1054 makes clear that, although drivers can choose where to take their rest periods, the regulation is designed to protect them from any pressure to avoid returning to their employer’s base or their home.