Now you see it, now you don't: discrimination 'vanished' after successful internal appeal
The sequence of events for the claimant in Little v Richmond Pharmacology Ltd, a sales executive working full time, was as follows: September 2009 — start of maternity leave following the birth of her second child; April 2010 — claimant applied for a flexible working arrangement to start on her scheduled return in August 2010; 17 June 2010 — her line manager rejected the application on the basis that it was not feasible for a sales executive to work part time; 9 July — claimant appealed; 14 July — appeal letter received by her employers; 19 July — claimant resigned; 19 July — employers asked her to reconsider until the appeal hearing took place; 22 July — appeal hearing, whereby the claimant was offered a three-month trial on the terms she had suggested; 26 July — claimant confirmed that her resignation stood.
The claimant’s case in her subsequent unlawful discrimination claim in the Employment Tribunal was that she had been subjected to a detriment when her application to work part time was refused on 17 June. But the tribunal, with whom the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) agreed, rejected that claim on the basis that because the line manager’s initial decision was expressed subject to the claimant’s right of appeal, it was in effect conditional on the outcome of an appeal. As that process was ultimately successful, the requirement to work full time was not to be applied to her when she completed her maternity leave. In other words, she had not suffered any detriment…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Hogan Lovells briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Hogan Lovells
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Hogan Lovells
Judgments handed down from the People’s Court all over the country will be available online from 1 January 2014, as part of the initiative by the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) to increase judicial transparency.
An issue that comes up fairly regularly in redundancy selection is whether employers must consider all employees in similar roles or whether they can opt for a ‘pool of one’.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The Lawyer’s latest Top 50 litigation firms list shows that business for dispute specialists is roaring along while new in-depth detail reveals the winning strategies
The Russian legal market faces a new era as the government opens the door to greater business transparency, but not everything is open to scrutiny