How will RM deal with sex descrimination cases if this deal gets in?

[LouBarlow]

Given that a lot of Women have worked in this job because it gives them the required hours to manage child care.
Can someone explain How RM might get around the potential class action which could be brought against them when they refuse to accommodate Women who need to finish before 3pm for childcare issues.
Also will the Union be taking up these cases if asked to, which seems unlikely as they may be seen as complicit in the discrimination perpetrated.

Are you living in the 1970s? Men are able to pick up children from school.

I am quite aware of what you allude to, but the sex discrimination act only recognizes women as a "protected characteristic". Do some reading before spouting off perhaps?

Could you point out where in the sex discrimination act where it states that employers have to make allowances for, specifically, women to pick up their children from school? After school clubs exist for a reason.

No such thing as the Sex Discrimination Act, obviously it's not that specific but the challenge could come
under the 'Indirect Discrimination' section of the Equality Act 2010 (s19):

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/19

https://www.acas.org.uk/discrimination- ... rimination

There is nothing in there that would justify legal action based on a female member of staff not being able to pick up their kids from school. That is why employees in every other profession out there, have to make provisions for picking them up, be it parents, or put them in after-school clubs.

[yellowbelly]

Given that a lot of Women have worked in this job because it gives them the required hours to manage child care.
Can someone explain How RM might get around the potential class action which could be brought against them when they refuse to accommodate Women who need to finish before 3pm for childcare issues.
Also will the Union be taking up these cases if asked to, which seems unlikely as they may be seen as complicit in the discrimination perpetrated.

Are you living in the 1970s? Men are able to pick up children from school.

I am quite aware of what you allude to, but the sex discrimination act only recognizes women as a "protected characteristic". Do some reading before spouting off perhaps?

Could you point out where in the sex discrimination act where it states that employers have to make allowances for, specifically, women to pick up their children from school? After school clubs exist for a reason.

No such thing as the Sex Discrimination Act, obviously it's not that specific but the challenge could come
under the 'Indirect Discrimination' section of the Equality Act 2010 (s19):

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/19

https://www.acas.org.uk/discrimination- ... rimination

There is nothing in there that would justify legal action based on a female member of staff not being able to pick up their kids from school. That is why employees in every other profession out there, have to make provisions for picking them up, be it parents, or put them in after-school clubs.

That's why I said it's 'not specific' and 'could' and it's not specifically about 'being able to pick up their kids from school' it's the
potential discrimination caused by the imposition of a policy that could contravene the Equality Act. And just because employees
in every other profession out there don't challenge what is being done doesn't mean that our colleagues can't or shouldn't does it?

As other posters have intimated RM have 'sold' roles on being 'family friendly' and if there are colleagues
affected by a company employment policy brought in through a collective agreement then there 'could' be a case under the act, 'possibly' for 'indirect discrimination' as a result - also see section 145 for 'Void and unenforceable terms' wrt collective agreements in the Equality Act:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/20 ... dertakings

Though whether CWU would collate those potential cases together is obviously highly doubtful as they want the
agreement to go through, whether a single employee or group of employees would want to go to ACAS/ET
would again be a decision for them.

Have a read of this too a bit more info for you from the UK based 'Working Families' website "The UK's national charity for working parents and carers": https://workingfamilies.org.uk/articles ... employees/

If your request for flexible working is refused, or your employer treats you unfairly in relation to your request, you may also experience unlawful discrimination under the Equality Act.

Unfortunately, parenting and caring is not protected characteristic under the Equality Act. But parents and carers who have their flexible working request refused may experience discrimination on the basis of sex, disability and marriage.

[Seymour Buts]

The irony of this post is that, certainly in our office, it's the majority of the blokes that do the school run coz most the wives have better jobs.

[LouBarlow]

The irony of this post is that, certainly in our office, it's the majority of the blokes that do the school run coz most the wives have better jobs.

Exactly the same in ours.

[Jimbo8t2]

The question is more sex discrimination than working later.

[pieoftheday]

Why just women? And what about the people who identify as the million other pro nouns? Not just women who look after kids.

I'm going to identify as an early riser so have to work from no later than 7am, RM wont be able to touch me

[k979aaa]

The ultimate decision on whether RM is family friendly will be a justification of employment tribunals and would look at other cases where people with responsibilities were discriminated by virtue of being a carer or parent. It is then the case can proceed as an action in the courts of the land if they do not accept a pay off. This could go to the high court of the land and the supreme court but I would not expect it to do so we do still have laws in this nation that the EU Repeal Bill of 2023 has not yet passed in parliament.

[ted_e_bear]

The irony of this post is that, certainly in our office, it's the majority of the blokes that do the school run coz most the wives have better jobs.

The irony of this post is that, certainly in our office, it's the majority of the blokes that do the school run coz most the wives have better jobs.

Exactly the same in ours.

Which brings us right back to the topic of resisting later starts.

[k979aaa]

The irony of this post is that, certainly in our office, it's the majority of the blokes that do the school run coz most the wives have better jobs.

The irony of this post is that, certainly in our office, it's the majority of the blokes that do the school run coz most the wives have better jobs.

Exactly the same in ours.

Which brings us right back to the topic of resisting later starts.

Not childcare friendly or as a carer of someone if that is your option but it is sexist to say only women care for others. But on the most part they do and do it without recognition of the fact the state still does not recognize this or the men who do this as well!