Flexible Working and Indirect Discrimination: The Pitfalls and Costs of Getting It Wrong

Mrs A Thompson v Scancrown Ltd T/a Manors: 2205199/2019

A tribunal decision underscores the importance of properly considering flexible working requests to avoid indirect sex discrimination.

The Facts 

Mrs Alice Thompson, a sales manager at a small estate agency, successfully claimed indirect sex discrimination after her request for flexible working hours was denied. After returning from maternity leave in 2019, Thompson sought flexible working arrangements, which were turned down on grounds of cost, potential impact on customer service, and the inability to reorganise work. Following the denial, Thompson resigned and brought claims to the Employment Tribunal.

Judgment

The tribunal found that the refusal of her request constituted indirect sex discrimination and awarded her £185,000 in compensation. The tribunal's ruling in favour of Mrs Thompson underscores that employers must carefully evaluate flexible working requests, particularly for employees with childcare responsibilities.

Commentary

This case serves as a crucial reminder for employers to handle flexible working requests with due consideration. Employers must ensure that they balance business needs with employees’ rights to avoid potential discrimination claims.

Call a specialist employment lawyer  

Magara law is an employment law firm in Bicester, Banbury, Reading and Paddington, London, and services clients nationwide. For more information or to our employment law team at Magara Law, call 01869 325 883 or email roy@magaralaw.co.uk.