Part-time and fixed-term employees




It is unlawful to select employees for redundancy because they are part-time or fixed-term, without objective justification. This is likely to be a breach of the Fixed-term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 (FTERs), or the Part-time Workers Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment Regulations 2000 (PTWRs) (see Chapter 2). 



Under the FTERs, employers must treat temporary employees “no less favourably” than equivalent permanent staff. Any difference must be capable of objective justification. This includes redundancy rights such as contractual redundancy procedures, redeployment and redundancy pay. Specifically, regulation 3(2)(c) FTER gives a fixed-term employee the right to the same chance to secure a permanent position of alternative employment as a comparable permanent employee at risk. Regulation 3(6) FTER gives the fixed-term employee a specific right to be informed of available vacancies. There is also a right to a written statement of the reasons for any less favourable treatment (for example, redundancy selection).


There may also be indirect sex discrimination. For example, in Whiffen v Milham Ford Girls School [2001] IRLR 468, a policy of selecting temporary employees for redundancy first amounted to indirect sex discrimination because women are more likely than men to hold temporary posts. More women than men also work part-time.


Scoring employees for their ability to demonstrate flexibility in work locations, shifts, working patterns and so on is likely to discriminate indirectly against women, who are more likely to have caring responsibilities or be secondary earners. Any such need for flexibility must be objectively justified by the role (London Transport v Edwards [1997] IRLR 157). See Chapter 7, page 253.