Temporary and part-time workers

Selection of temporary employees for redundancy because of their temporary status is likely to be indirect sex discrimination, as well as being a potential breach of the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002. In Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls’ School [2001] IRLR 468, a policy of selecting temporary employees for redundancy first was indirectly discriminatory on grounds of sex because there were proportionately more women than men in temporary posts.

Similarly, women are statistically more likely than men to work part-time. As a result, it is likely to be indirect sex discrimination, as well as a potential breach of the Part-time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 to select part-time workers for redundancy because of their part-time status.

Selecting employees based on the need to demonstrate flexibility (for example, annualised hours or anti-social shifts) or mobility (ability to work across a range of locations) may be indirectly discriminatory to women (London Transport v Edwards [1997] IRLR 157 EAT) and must be justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

For more information on indirect discrimination see LRD’s annual employment law guide Law at Work (www.lrdpublications.org.uk/lawatwork).