Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

In the case of Ms T Peart v Care Preference Limited (1806064/2018), the Employment Tribunal held that the Claimant has been dismissed for asserting a statutory right and also upheld her complaint that her dismissal was unfavourable treatment because of her pregnancy.

The facts in Ms T Peart v Care Preference Limited

Mrs Peart (the ‘Claimant’) was a personal care assistant for Care Preference Limited (the ‘Respondent’).  She was part of a team that provided round the clock care to SU, a wheelchair user who had lifting equipment in her home.

The Claimant’s contract of employment limited the Claimant’s hours to ‘no more than 48 hours a week averaged over a 17-week period’.  In addition, there was an ‘on call policy’ which required the Claimant to participate in emergency cover arrangements should another team member be unable to fulfil their duties.  Previously, the Respondent had dismissed four employees for failing to comply with their on-call obligations.

In December 2018 SU had a hair appointment outside of her home which meant that she needed lifting.  The Claimant was less than 12 weeks pregnant at the time and told the team leader, Miss Gamble, whose response was that she had enough on her plate without the Claimant’s pregnancy on top.

In March 2019, Ms Stauffer, one of the other teams’ members who cared for SU, questioned the Claimant on how she was going to cope when she was more heavily pregnant.

The Claimant has previously accompanied the SU on holiday and there was a possibility that she would again be required to do so.  The Claimant was advised by Mr James, the owner of the Respondent, that in the absence of medical evidence showing she was unfit, she would be required to travel with the SU again.

Subsequently there was then an issue between the Claimant and Respondent when the Claimant informed the Respondent that she wished to be relieved from her on call duties as she could not fulfil them and was unhappy about the number of hours she was being asked to work (most recently two 48 hour shifts in a week).  She missed an on-call shift over the weekend of the 9 March due to issues with childcare.   She then missed another weekend shift on the advice of her GP and went on the e-mail Mr James, advising him that she was no longer willing to work in excess of 48 hours in any given week.

Subsequently, Mr James wrote to the Clamant on 19 March asking her to attend a meeting to discuss the ‘issues’ including a refusal to attend on call duties. Following that meeting the Claimant was summarily dismissed.

The decision of the Employment Tribunal (ET)

The Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) did not accept that Miss Gambles’ single unfortunate remark was sufficient to amount to a contravention of the Equality Act by ‘detriment’ or unfavourable treatment because of the Claimant’s pregnancy.  The same went for Ms Stauffer’s comments in March.   With regards to Mr James’ instruction that she would have to accompany SU on holiday, dispute being pregnant, in the absence of medical evidence excusing her, the ET found this to be a lawful and reasonable instruction.

Section 101A(A) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘ERA 1996’) provides ‘An employee who is dismissed shall be regarded….as unfairly dismissed if the reason (or if more than one, the principle reason)…is that the employee (b) refused (or proposed to refuse) to forgo a right confirmed on him by [the Working Time Regulations].

The Claimant’s complaint that she was unfairly dismissed for asserting a statutory right conferred by the Working Time Regulations 1998 succeeded.  The ET dismissed the Respondent’s assertion that the singular reason for dismissing the Claimant was her failure to confirm her attendance for an on-call weekend shift on the weekend of 9 March.  The invitation to a meeting was not communicated in the calls on the 8 March, but instead followed the Claimant sending an e-mail notifying the Respondent of her sickness absence and putting it in writing that she could no longer work in excess of 48 hour shifts due to her changed circumstances.  The ET held that the principal reason for the Claimant’s dismissal was her proposal that she would no longer work in excess of the Working Time Regulations limit on average working hours.

The ET then went on to consider whether the Claimant’s pregnancy was an effective cause of her dismissal. They held that in all the circumstances of the case the Claimant’s pregnancy and her refusal to work more than 48 hours a week were indivisible and as such the pregnancy was an effective cause of her dismissal.  The Claimant’s complaint that her dismissal was unfavourable treatment because of her pregnancy also succeeded.

Our solicitors’ views on the case of in Ms T Peart v Care Preference Limited

Sacha Barrett, a Senior Associate in the employment department at Redmans, made the following comment on the case: “Industries such as the care industry whose operating, financial and service user model intrinsically rely on employees working in excess of 48 hours per week would be well served to consider having contingency plans in place should an employee  lawfully want to reverse their authorisation to work those hours”

The decision of the Employment Tribunal in Ms T Peart v Care Preference Limited (1806064/2018) can be found here.

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.76 Average

164 Reviews

Samantha K

Absolutely brilliant thank you. Caroline Lewis is a legend

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

The legal advice was clear and helpful.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Davinder P

Good Service

Posted 2 weeks ago

Adrian V

I was using Redmans services for a Settlement Agreement. Very quick and professional service. The outcome was favourable and I was very pleased with the amendments and results. Pretty glad to recommend them for any type of legal advice.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

Very responsive, efficient, clear and supportive. Thank you! Highly recommend.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Tiago S

Chris was always prompt to help me with legal matters that are beyond my comprehension and very helpful leasing with my former employer. I would recommend Redmans Solicitors to everyone who needs help.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

Fast and professional advice tailored to what was needed. Thanks for your help Chris Hadrill and team.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Peter S

Really pleased with the outcome and the advice I had from Chris and Sacha.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Harika A

Redmans solicitor's helped me with my settlement agreement, Chris has been very helpful throughout the process.He was very prompt in his responses and made my settlement look simple.Special thanks to Caroline for her efficient communication, thorough explaination of contract terminology and negotiations.I highly reccommend Redmans solicitors for anyone seeking employment related legal help.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Good and quick service

Posted 3 weeks ago

Ricky D

Very satisfying to be assured of such attention and professionalism.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Excellent service - thankyou

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Efficient, timely and friendly support and advice

Posted 3 weeks ago

Ahmed S

They are always on hand when you need them and provide support even when its not necessary.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Nemen S

Wonderful experience.Chris was very responsive and provided an excellent service. A real professional who I would recommend to anyone

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Their guidance was clear and they provided me with all the information I required. Friendly yet professional

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Chris @ Redmans assisted me with an employment issue. Firstly, he was very proactive in coming back to my initial enquiry and then helped to clearly lay out the options that I had in relation to my position. He then assisted with the preparation of my case, which led to a very satisfactory outcome. I would highly recommend the quality of service & professionalism offered by Redmans Solicitors.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Great service

Posted 3 weeks ago

Anonymous

Chris was very effective and decisive in dealing with my matter. I felt guided, and the pressure to make decisions was taken off my shoulders; he knew what needed to be done and I was happy to follow his advice. The result of the legal dispute was a great success for me. He is also kind and personable. The only thing that I would say it could be improved, is the accuracy of cost estimation at the beginning: not many activites, that could not have been forseen had to take place, but costs went up more than double in the end. Overall very good and trustworthy. I would definately recommend and use Redmans services again.

Posted 3 weeks ago

Liz P

An excellent professional service was provided by Chris Hadrill and Mel Chin. Efficient and trustworthy - would highly recommend this company.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Redmans Solicitors were great. They were able to advice me quickly and efficiently! I would recommend them, as a good solicitors to use.

Posted 1 month ago