court decides the lack of family-friendly hours is not discriminatory.

[DaveNewcastle]

A female Cross-Country driver in Newcastle was unsuccessful in challenging the Employment Tribunal's decision that the lack of available turns during 'family-friendly' hours discriminated aganist women, but she was successful in her challenge that the Company had failed to recognise her needs adequately, giving the Company's needs greater weight. Her claim is returned to the Employment Tribunal for a fuller re-consideration of her proper child-care needs.

Having 3 children, she requested a 4 day week between Monday and Friday, working between 8am and 6pm, with no Saturday and no Sunday working. The evidence included the fact that so few women are employed as drivers, and the tribunal had noted that ". . . unless something is done to break the circle, one of the last male work bastions will be perpetuated" and the Company submitted that it "required its drivers to work antisocial hours to provide the service it was contractually required to provide in recognition of which its employees commanded high salaries. …”

The full decision can be read here:- XC Trains Ltd v C.D. & ASLEF and others.

'In common with all other drivers [of that Company] the Claimant’s contractual duties are to work a 35 hour week over 6 days with daily working hours determined by the requirements of the depot but not less than five hours and not more than ten hours per day. There is also an obligation to work on rostered Sundays.'

The Tribunal had accepted the Company's claims that " … Any permanent change to the contract of one driver is bound to affect the timetables of all other drivers on that same link. …” , “ … if possible, so called “accommodations” are reached with drivers which grant a variation to working patterns on a temporary basis …” but the Company had replied : “Unfortunately we were unable to come to an agreement with your requested days and times on the grounds that: it would unfairly deny other Newcastle drivers the same access to the only two family friendly diagrams as this would obviously be a long term requirement.”

I'm familiar with some East Coast crew who work part time, and who enjoy working turns which do allow them to meet their particular needs, (e.g. only working two days a week, on weekdays, and returning home in time for the end of the school day; or only working two days a week at weekends on lates.).

 

[DarloRich]

interesting - thanks for sharing

 

[AntoniC]

Its an interesting read and thanks for posting it.

Its similar to the Civil Service for whom I work.

You can ask for reasonable adjustments in the hours you work, but they are not obliged to grant such a request if they can prove that it would adversely affect the business.

 

[Andy-mc]

I can see both sides of the argument, but drivers (and most rail workers) are known to work unsociable hours and I'm pretty sure she would have been aware of this when she became a driver, and equally I'm sure the company would have known who they were hiring, but the main issue is if you give a Mum more favourable hours to look after her kids then surely this would be discriminatory towards the Dads would like to be able to spend more time with their families

 

[yorkie]

....but the main issue is if you give a Mum more favourable hours to look after her kids then surely this would be discriminatory towards the Dads would like to be able to spend more time with their families...

True, you can't discriminate on the basis of gender, it should be based on need

.... was unsuccessful in challenging the Employment Tribunal's decision that the lack of available turns during 'family-friendly' hours discriminated aganist women, but she was successful in her challenge that the Company had failed to recognise her needs adequately.....

 

[ComUtoR]

Thanks for posting.

 

[W230]

Very interesting. We have a guy at my TOC who works Monday - Thursday only and has been accommodated by rosters for child related issues but it's rare. In fact he's the only one that i'm aware of, though we do have a part time link of Tuesday - Wednesday - Thursday. From what little I know of his situation though, he needs all the help he can get.

FWIW I think there would be carnage on the rosters if she had been sucessful!!

I do a lot of the childcare in my home with very young children. Do i like having to work so many evenings/weekends? Nope, but that's the job I signed up for. Maybe if work life is too restricting she could look at going part time or even getting a different job.

I used to find it really annoying in my last job (pre-railway) where some of my colleagues with kids used them as an excuse as to why they couldn't do this that and the other.

 

[rhysa85]

A very interesting read, thanks for sharing.

I am only just about to begin my new career as a driver, so have absolutely no idea about the male to female dynamic within the industry at present. With regards to the statistic of male/females employed by this company (99%), i'd be curious to know if that ratio is the same with regards to applicants for new positions.

I found the following statement from the report slightly controversial:

79. The decision of the ET and related findings of fact that the PCP puts women at a particular disadvantage and that it puts the Claimant at that disadvantage remain in place.

Surely this is applicable to all with a childcare need and not just women - I appreciate that the claimant's personal situation puts her at a disadvantage, but all women?

 

[W230]

Surely this is applicable to all with a childcare need and not just women - I appreciate that the claimant's personal situation puts her at a disadvantage, but all women?

Agreed. As Yorkie says above, it shouldn't be based on gender but on need. I work for a London centric TOC and we have a fair few female drivers but still in the minority. However, there are loads of female trainee drivers and while still not as many as there are male, it's a better representation.

 

[theironroad]

Interesting. Long term accommodation to 'family friendly ' hours is one of the most contentious issues I know, because nobody really likes the extreme shifts, but when a few people are accomodated, the extreme shift workload falls on the rest just following the roster or doing mutual swaps. Clearly, this is exacerbated at smaller depots.

As a slight aside, xc drivers are in a far better position financially than most other drivers to pay for childcare.

 

[Phil.]

She wanted to work Monday to Thursday only. Why did she apply for a job with an organisation that runs seven days a week? Sorry but that's taking the proverbial.

 

[Dave1987]

Wow bet she is popular in the mess room now.....

 

[TheVicLine]

A 4 day week between Mon - Fri and 8am - 6pm only lol lol lol.

Would have been mayhem if she had been granted that, I for one would have had more kids haha. It's not like drivers unsociable hours have just suddenly appeared. Sorry I know she is a fellow driver and all that but I've got no sympathy at all.

P taker, one in every depot...

 

[Bellbell]

A 4 day week between Mon - Fri and 8am - 6pm only lol lol lol.

Would have been mayhem if she had been granted that, I for one would have had more kids haha. It's not like drivers unsociable hours have just suddenly appeared. Sorry I know she is a fellow driver and all that but I've got no sympathy at all.

P taker, one in every depot...

I for one, would complain. I don't know whether I'd get anywhere, but all it would do is increase the frequency that the awful turns get doled out to the rest of us.

I'm a woman of what you might cringingly describe as child bearing age and I have to say that some of my female colleagues do absolutely nothing to enhance the position of women in the industry. It's not like the hours and the weekend working were a bloody secret!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In fact, I wonder how you'd get on with a health based complaint from having to do more anti social hours shifts if someone got accommodated on M-F, 8-6. Shift work has been proven to be detrimental to health, but I don't know if it's cumulative or not.

 

[Andy-mc]

one of the first things listed in the Job Description of a Train driver advertisement (and again most railway job descriptions) is:
- must be willing/able to work unsociable hours including nights and weekends
and for the poor souls on freight/infrastructure Christmas day is included

The company could have tried to accommodate her by offering her part-time or job share although she would obviously incur a financial loss as a result, or offer her a secondment to a more family friendly role while she needs it.

 

[Dave1987]

A 4 day week between Mon - Fri and 8am - 6pm only lol lol lol.

Would have been mayhem if she had been granted that, I for one would have had more kids haha. It's not like drivers unsociable hours have just suddenly appeared. Sorry I know she is a fellow driver and all that but I've got no sympathy at all.

P taker, one in every depot...

Well every other driver be it male or female who have a few children would be entitled to exactly the same otherwise they would have been discriminated against. It's almost getting to a point where men are being positively discriminated against. I've heard of applications for trainee driver positions from women automatically getting through the sift no matter how good or bad simply because people believe it's not right that it's a male dominated industry. Don't see any attempts in getting more males into primary school teaching roles.

 

[222007]

So glad someone decided to take some action regardless of how silly this seems on the face of it. As a former employee for CrossCountry i was forced to leave because the company would not give me child friendly hour despite the fact what i did for the company did not effect whether trains ran or not. I made repeated requests over a 4 years period because as a single dad with custody of two small children my relationship status changed after i had been employed for 3 years. I have to say all i asked was for a level playing field with female member's of staff something i was never given the chance of.

 

[AlterEgo]

I think this was clearly a test case brought by ASLEF. An interesting decision. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Bellbell]

one of the first things listed in the Job Description of a Train driver advertisement (and again most railway job descriptions) is:
- must be willing/able to work unsociable hours including nights and weekends
and for the poor souls on freight/infrastructure Christmas day is included

The company could have tried to accommodate her by offering her part-time or job share although she would obviously incur a financial loss as a result, or offer her a secondment to a more family friendly role while she needs it.

Tricky one though - job share is possibly easiest from a company perspective, although it obviously requires someone else who wants a job share! Plus it increases management time (two sets of rules and rides for one line of the link). We have a few on job share though, and it seems the best compromise for all, including those still on full time normal shifts who resent it less than fixed shifts.

A secondment creates a few more issues - retraining on resumption of substantive post, plus you can't recruit a temporary driver to cover the secondment so the work remains uncovered. Also, secondments can only last so long can't they? Might not be long enough to cover her until child care becomes less of an issue.

 

[Johncleesefan]

I do understand why her argument didn't stand as don't cross country work all shifts as required until the week approaches?

I wonder if they could set up an accommodated turn link for her

 

[Flying_Turtle]

This kind of situation should only be acomodated on a case by case scenario and with the agreement of union and company.
One thing is when you get into things by option, other are unforseen circumstances. For example, when a father or mother suddenly see them selves alone in the world with kids to raise!
Apart from that you know what you came for and the nature of the service! DEAL WITH IT!

 

[JohnFM]

A female Cross-Country driver in Newcastle was unsuccessful in challenging the Employment Tribunal's decision that the lack of available turns during 'family-friendly' hours discriminated aganist women, but she was successful in her challenge that the Company had failed to recognise her needs adequately, giving the Company's needs greater weight. Her claim is returned to the Employment Tribunal for a fuller re-consideration of her proper child-care needs.

Good, I for one am glad that she failed.

1. She took the job knowing the hours.
2. What about men, are they not allowed "family friendly" hours?

Funny how women claim it to be sexist but only when they don't get their way, but it's OK for men to do the same shifts and it be OK.

It is interesting that she brought 31 claims against 7 different people. Simply to ensure that, on a law of probabilities, some of the **** sticks to someone.

 

[Economist]

I've heard of applications for trainee driver positions from women automatically getting through the sift no matter how good or bad simply because people believe it's not right that it's a male dominated industry.

I may be wrong but I'd think that ironically in many cases that might work against the candidate concerned. If they haven't got good competency examples to add to the application form, or just aren't that bothered, then surely the aptitude tests (MMI in particular) would catch them out and they'd be left with only one attempt.

 

[RJ]

I think this individual is a rebel without a cause. She has chosen to do a job which involves working with trains that move 24/7 and is happy to deny her colleagues the opportunity to work the few available family friendly shifts. The adjustments she seeks are not reasonable.

She's at liberty to look for a job that is more compatible with her outside commitments - I guess the majority of jobs out there fit within her chosen parameters, judging by how pronounced travel demand is at peak times. Choosing to do shift work, then trying to force the company to pander to her needs only when the nature of the work makes that impractical is out of order.

 

[Louby]

Well every other driver be it male or female who have a few children would be entitled to exactly the same otherwise they would have been discriminated against. It's almost getting to a point where men are being positively discriminated against. I've heard of applications for trainee driver positions from women automatically getting through the sift no matter how good or bad simply because people believe it's not right that it's a male dominated industry. Don't see any attempts in getting more males into primary school teaching roles.

I see your point but believe me I've failed the sift few times

 

[JCLeeds]

Glad she failed. This sort of thing gives the very valid efforts towards equality a bad name. It is actually sexist on her part to claim that the hours she agreed to are sexually discriminatory - if Mums and Dads are equal parents, why should females get preferential treatment over males?
Or should it be illegal for anyone with children to work evenings and weekends if they don't want? Even if they signed up for it voluntarily when they took the job?

 

[Muttley]

...despite the fact what i did for the company did not effect whether trains ran or not...

Some statement that.

 

[Dave1987]

I see your point but believe me I've failed the sift few times

I'm all for equality, in fact the females we have at our depot are treated no differently to the males. But equality works both ways.

 

[DarloRich]

Good, I for one am glad that she failed.

1. She took the job knowing the hours.
2. What about men, are they not allowed "family friendly" hours?

Funny how women claim it to be sexist but only when they don't get their way, but it's OK for men to do the same shifts and it be OK.

It is interesting that she brought 31 claims against 7 different people. Simply to ensure that, on a law of probabilities, some of the **** sticks to someone.

YES: MEN ARE ALLOWED FAMILY FRIENDLY HOURS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU SIMPLY HAVE TO ASK argh! The law on flexible working applies to all employees equally. Obviously an employer can refuse to grant an application for flexible working on the basis they have a compelling business reason to do so. However its is a right of us all to ask the question is if we so wish.

(Breathe, breathe breathe!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think this individual is a rebel without a cause. She has chosen to do a job which involves working with trains that move 24/7 and is happy to deny her colleagues the opportunity to work the few available family friendly shifts. The adjustments she seeks are not reasonable.

She's at liberty to look for a job that is more compatible with her outside commitments - I guess the majority of jobs out there fit within her chosen parameters, judging by how pronounced travel demand is at peak times. Choosing to do shift work, then trying to force the company to pander to her needs only when the nature of the work makes that impractical is out of order.

circumstances change and people should not be precluded from asking for alterations to their terms simply because of the perceived nature of a job.

 

[SJN]

We have quite a few male and female drivers and guards on family friendly links. They do earn less than the ones who do full shift work though,