Higher Education staff in the United Kingdom (UK) work long hours to complete their duties. In a 2021 survey, staff reported a weekly average of 51 hours: a fact well understood to undermine health and educational quality. Yet, UK law sets a maximum working week of 48 hours, and failure to uphold this maximum is a criminal offence for employers. Seeking to understand this contradiction, the article reveals that staff are denied otherwise universal legal Health and Safety protection by the development and reinforcement of legal interpretation that assumes they have sufficient 'autonomy' to avoid overwork. As this is a position mutually constructed and accepted by both employers and unions, all efforts to reduce hours, including Industrial Action, have worked from this premise. However, critical analysis of university Terms and Conditions, against relevant jurisprudential developments, adds significant original value by questioning the validity of the status quo legal interpretation. Specifically, a landmark legal ruling against the UK by the European Court of Justice, and the resulting 2006 amendment to the UK Working Time Regulations, strongly suggests most University Terms and Conditions are legally noncompliant. As such, HE stakeholders should pressure powerbrokers involved in this omnipresent dispute to revisit the law: specifically with a view to re-establishing any fundamental rights of which they are currently illegitimately deprived. Where this was successful, empirically informed "weekly" workload modelling -- rather than irrelevant, abstract annual calculations -- would become a legally enforceable necessity for the benefit of staff and students alike.