Doncaster mum wins £17,000 following sex discrimination tribunal against One Call Claims

Roxy Powell took the Carolina Court firm to court after bosses refused to alter her shift patterns by just a matter of minutes to pick her child up from nursery.

An employment tribunal in Sheffield has now ruled in her favour with a judge describing her complaint of constructive unfair dismissal “well founded.”

An indirect sex discrimination complaint also succeeded, with Roxy receiving a total sum of £16,413 from the firm.

Roxy, of Town End Drive, Doncaster, started working for the insurance group in September 2015 but took maternity leave in 2019, hoping to return to work after nine months.

In her submission to the court, she wrote: “In April 2020 I emailed HR to see if it was possible to come back to work on a part time basis at the end of May 2020 when my nine months of maternity leave would have been up.

“When I returned to work my son went to a childminder but he was not settled there at all so I started to look for a new childminder.

“In February 2021 I had found a new childminder for my son and he was placed on her waiting list for September 2021 as this was the next time she would have availability for him.

"I went to a viewing day in August 2021 ahead of my son starting and I was told she only works until 17:30 so I advised I would speak to my manager to see if it was possible to adjust my shifts on two out of the six days for an earlier finish.”

However, in a one to one meeting with a boss, she was told the shift change had been rejected as “other people take their kids to childcare around work so they can’t let me leave early.”

She said that the rules mostly applied to fathers working for the company and said: “This is indirect sex discrimination as they expect me to manage with childcare the same as a father does but mothers are the ones that take the biggest role in the care of the child.

She asked bosses again to finish 10-15 minutes early, offering to start earlier or make the time back during her lunch breaks, telling them that if they couldn’t agree to the changes she would have to hand her notice in.

She said: “They would not authorise my early finish as they had to be consistent with what they tell staff and no one else is allowed to leave early for childcare.

There was no offer or consideration to move teams, departments, perform another job role, move away from the phones in order to accommodate my request, even if this was not possible it still should have been looked at and discussed with me.

"To let a staff member go with six years experience over 30 minutes every two weeks is not something I can understand.

"I had no choice but to leave One Call Claims due to the discrimination against me being a mother, and the constructive dismissal.”

In response, boss Mitchell Broadhurst, then Head of Claims Operations at the firm, said: “I was aware that the claimant worked a pattern of reduced hours which had been agreed upon her return from maternity leave. This change had been introduced in September 2020 and accommodated for the claimant to work 22.5 hours per week.

“In August 2021, I was presented with a further request for a change of working hours from the claimant. The claimant sent a text message to me on the 13 August which requested to alter her working hours to work from 8.30am until 5.00pm. The claimant then submitted a further request via email to request to finish 10-15 minutes earlier.

“I considered the claimant’s request however I felt it was difficult to accommodate due to a number of reasons.

“The claimant worked within the Hire and Repairs team which operates from 9.00am – 5.30pm. It is often the case that the end of the day can be a particularly busy period as the activities of the team are arranging logistics for customers and arranging the collection of cars which can be fast moving and lead to changes at the end of the working day when either trying to accommodate late changes, or liaise with the garage network that fulfil the allocated work.

"I felt that accommodating a change to reduce the workforce at this latter stage of the day would present significant challenges at a time where the business was looking to rebuild and increase its workload following the pandemic period. I also felt that with the request being for a small part of the day that it would be difficult to accommodate a job share across a small portion of hours or redeploy resource that would leave other areas of the business at a potential disadvantage.

"As the phone lines do not open until 9.00am, allowing the claimant to work early and leave early would be ineffective for the needs of the business and leave the department significantly under resourced at a pivotal part of the day.”

She ended up quitting on 22 September 2021, with the tribunal ruling in her favour this week.

Employment judge Joanna Wade said: “The claimant’s complaint of constructive unfair dismissal is well founded and

succeeds.

“The claimant’s indirect sex discrimination complaint also succeeds.

“The respondent shall pay to the claimant a basic award of £857.28 and a compensatory Award of £8196.08.

“The respondent shall further pay to the claimant £7000 as an award for injury to feelings, and £360 in interest.

“The total sum payable is £16,413.36.”