Flexible working, childcare and indirect sex discrimination – important reminder
The courts have long recognised that, on a societal level, women bear a greater burden of childcare responsibilities than men which can make it more difficult for women to comply with employer requirements for flexible working (known as the ‘childcare disparity’).
The courts have long recognised that, on a societal level, women bear a greater burden of childcare responsibilities than men which can make it more difficult for women to comply with employer requirements for flexible working (known as the ‘childcare disparity’). This recognition has historically assisted women who make claims for indirect sex discrimination on the basis of a requirement to work flexibly applied to both men and women which has a particular disadvantageous effect on women due to the childcare disparity.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal confirmed last week in Dobson v North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust that the childcare disparity still persists in 2021 despite advances being made to address the inequality in recent years. It does not necessarily follow that in all cases where the childcare disparity applies, there will be a group disadvantage. It also does not necessarily follow that if in a particular case a woman can establish that a requirement to work flexibly puts her to a disadvantage due to childcare responsibilities, the employment tribunal should assume that it also puts women as a group to a disadvantage due to the childcare disparity. However, in some cases, such an inference may be appropriate, requiring the employer to objectively justify the flexible working requirement to avoid a finding of indirect sex discrimination.
Although the Employment Appeal Tribunal recognised that this assumption may become inappropriate in the future as further progress is made on sharing the childcare burden more equally, it noted that the position is still far from equal.
Whilst this case represents a re-statement of the current law and is perhaps not as landmark as reported in the media, it is an important reminder to employers that care must be taken in reaching decisions on working patterns in relation to employees with childcare responsibilities. Employers should take care to ensure that any decisions that could put a working parent to a disadvantage go no further than is necessary, are justified and are properly recorded. If employers are in any doubt, they should seek professional advice.
Contact
Mark Hickson
Head of Business Development
onlineteaminbox@brownejacobson.com
+44 (0)370 270 6000
Related expertise
You may be interested in...
Opinion
Empowering your workforce: Key tips on adjustments for new starters
Press Release
Browne Jacobson and NHS Transformation Unit explore provider group models in new report
Legal Update
Expanding your private patients unit roundtable
Opinion
Duty of candour and patient safety incidents: Proposed amendments to CQC Regulations
On-Demand
Shaping a culture of respect and safety: Preventing sexual harassment in our schools
Legal Update
Top five takeaways for schools on the Employment Rights Bill
Legal Update
Building an inclusive workplace: strategies for attracting and retaining disabled talent
On-Demand
How schools can grapple with new employment law to thrive in a new era
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises The Jordon Group on transformative merger
Online Event - Shared Insights
Shared Insights: Have your say on the 10 Year Health Plan for England
Legal Update
Roundtable report: Community engagement in high street regeneration
Legal Update - Maternity services
MNSI annual report 2023/24: Key insights and future ambitions for maternity safety
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises UK’s leading fire protection specialist on key acquisition
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises IT solutions specialist on sale to Goldman Sachs-backed international digital transformation provider
Opinion
New Mental Health Bill to be introduced in Parliament
Online Event
EdCon 2025
Legal Update
Breaking the glass ceiling: Empowering female leadership in the food and drink sector
Opinion - Maternity services
Enhancing care for women with ectopic pregnancies: Insights from MBRRACE-UK
Guide
Guide to inquests for mental health patients
Legal Update
Ozempic: The rising costs and coverage issues of weight loss medication
Legal Update - Employment Rights Bill
What does the Employment Rights Bill mean for employment practices liability insurance?
Opinion - Employment Rights Bill
Beyond the Bill: Exploring the horizon of new employment rights and proposed measures
Legal Update - Employment Rights Bill
Labour’s employment law reforms: Employment Rights Bill unveiled
Legal Update
Expanding the role of school attendance mentors
Legal Update
ABC pilot: Improving maternity safety to prevent brain injuries in childbirth
Online Event
Managing safeguarding allegations against staff
Press Release
Browne Jacobson advises UK climbing operator on sale to Belgian investment firm
Legal Update - Maternity services
DISCERN study published: How to improve discussions with families when things go wrong in maternity care
Legal Update
Organisational approaches to ESG and sustainability matters
Legal Update
Balancing acts: Navigating the complex risks in adult social care provision
Opinion
Lord Darzi’s report on the NHS in England and the future of mental health care
Legal Update
What the UK Covid-19 Inquiry means for higher education providers
Opinion
New anticipatory duty to prevent sexual harassment at work: final EHRC guidance published
Opinion
Employment tribunal case shines light on mistaken customer communications
Press Release
Browne Jacobson launches new HR services offering in health and social care
Press Release
Browne Jacobson and CBI roundtable explores how to finance public infrastructure post-PFI
Opinion
Navigating the new norms of flexible working and reasonable adjustments
Legal Update
Employment Healthcare Briefing: October 2024
Legal Update
What does the Supreme Court decision in Tesco v USDAW mean for NHS employers?
