A Primark employee who quit her job after being told that she would have to make herself available to work late shifts has accused the brand of sexism. The woman, who worked as a department manager at a store in Bury, took her case to an employment tribunal, citing indirect sex discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal but was unsuccessful.
But she won an appeal at a hearing in London last month, as reported by MEN. And a judge has now ordered that her case be heard again after ruling the original tribunal "failed to properly address" her complaint.
The tribunal heard that the anonymous woman had applied for her contracted hours to be changed as she prepared to return to work in November 2019 following after being on maternity leave. The store's manager told the tribunal he had been prepared to agree to accommodate the woman's request not to work late shifts on other days, but was unable to do so on Thursdays.
He added that she did not have to work every Thursday late shift - between 10.30am and 8.30pm - but would need to ensure her availability to work if "absolutely necessary and there was no alternative cover". However, the woman responded that as a result of her having sole responsibility for her child and only limited support from her mother, she could not do that.
The dispute eventually led to the woman, who had worked at Primark for more than eight years, to resign from her position. In her claim against Primark, she argued that the contractual requirement for department managers to guarantee availability "put women at a particular disadvantage compared to men", a claim the retailer disputes.
Although the employment tribunal dismissed her case, her appeal was upheld by the president of the employment appeal tribunal, Mrs Justice Eady. She said that in assessing the woman's case, the tribunal had compared the discriminatory impact on her to two male colleagues to whom Primark "had not applied the same degree of compulsion, namely the requirement that they guarantee their availability for the late shifts in question."
The judge added that there was "no obvious logic" to the pool selected, and therefore the tribunal's conclusions "must be set aside in their entirety". The case will now return to the original tribunal, which will reconsider the claims of indirect discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal. A Primark spokesperson said: “We are aware of the case in question. Equality and fairness are core values we hold dear at Primark, and are the foundation of how we work to provide supportive and inclusive workplaces for every employee.”
