Part-time work
In Long v British Gas Trading Ltd, an employment tribunal held that the selection for redundancy of a part-time employee who was the mother of young children was sex discrimination, less favourable treatment because of part-time working and an unfair dismissal.
In Broadist v HM Prison Service, an employment tribunal found that the employer's refusal to allow a semi-retired dog handler to remain working on a part-time basis with an alternative dog, after his dog had died, amounted to indirect age discrimination.
In British Airways plc v Pinaud, the Court of Appeal held that a part-time worker's contract requiring her to be available for work 53.5% of the time that a full-time comparator was required to be available for work constituted less favourable treatment because she was paid only 50% of the full-time salary.
In Roddis v Sheffield Hallam University, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that a lecturer employed under a zero hours contract was employed under the same type of contract as a permanent full-time lecturer for the purposes of his claim of less favourable treatment under the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 (SI 2000/1551).
Kirsti Laird is senior associate at Charles Russell Speechlys. She rounds up the latest rulings.
Amanda Steadman is a professional support lawyer, Iain Naylor, Lucy Sorell and Rachael Wake are associates, and Jessica-Alice Curtis is a trainee solicitor at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
Claire Thomas is managing associate, and Chris McAvoy, Joelle Parkinson, David Rintoul, and Gerri Hurst associates at Addleshaw Goddard LLP. They round up the latest rulings.
The Court of Appeal has held that there could be no remedy for part-time female workers who were prevented from joining an occupational pension scheme during particular periods because they would not have chosen to join the pension scheme even if they had been eligible to do so.
In Carl v University of Sheffield [2009] IRLR 616 EAT, the EAT held that a part-time worker complaining of less favourable treatment does not have to show that the treatment was solely on the ground of his or her part-time status. The EAT also held that the comparison must be with an actual, not a hypothetical, comparator.
In Sharma and others v Manchester City Council [2008] IRLR 336, the EAT held that part-time status does not need to be the sole reason for less favourable treatment, as compared to that of a full-time worker, for a complaint of unlawful discrimination to succeed.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to part-time work.