Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Case lawEmployment law

Case of the week: Part-time status does not have to be only reason for discriminatory treatment

by Personnel Today 17 Mar 2008
by Personnel Today 17 Mar 2008

Sharma & Others v Manchester City Council

Part-time status need not be the sole reason for discriminatory treatment for a claim to succeed under the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 (the Regulations).

FACTS

Miss Sharma and her colleagues were employed as part-time lecturers for Manchester City Council’s Adult Education Service. Their contracts contained a term that allowed the council to reduce their hours, subject to a minimum annual total of one-third of the hours worked in the previous year. Not all part-timers were subject to this term. By way of a cost-saving exercise, the council triggered the reduction in hours for the part-time employees who were subject to this specific term and many of their hours were substantially reduced.

Sharma and her colleagues complained to an employment tribunal that the reduction clause, and the reduction itself, amounted to less favourable treatment, as this term did not apply to full-timers. Relying on a previous case of Gibson v The Scottish Ambulance Service, the tribunal rejected the claim on the basis that the claimants’ part-time status was not the sole reason for the treatment â€“ other reasons applied as well, such as the fact that the part-time contracts contained the reduction clause. The claimants appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

DECISION

The EAT allowed the appeal and dismissed the “sole reason” test that the tribunal had adopted.

The EAT said that part-time status need not be the sole reason for less favourable treatment in order that a successful claim could be brought under the regulations. For less favourable treatment to be potentially unlawful, the part-time status need only be a partial reason (or one of a number of reasons) and not the whole or only reason. The EAT stated that it did not matter if other part-time employees were not also subject to the less favourable treatment if their part-time status is a reason for the adverse treatment. To the extent that Gibson had decided that part-time status had to be the sole reason for the less favourable treatment, this was incorrect.

KEY IMPLICATIONS

This decision highlights a departure from the approach taken in Gibson by bringing the concept of part-time discrimination into line with other forms of discrimination, such as sex or race, where the ground of discrimination need only be part of the reason for the less favourable treatment.

Employers will no longer be able to rely on the argument that, as long as they treat some part-timers proportionately equal to full-time comparators, the regulations will not protect the part-timers who are treated less well. Employers should conduct a review of part-time terms and conditions to ensure they are pro-rated as against full-time terms and conditions. Where a comparable full-time worker is entitled to pay or any other benefit, the part-time worker should be entitled to a proportion of that pay and benefit, based on the proportion of hours worked when compared to a full-timer’s weekly hours.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This case is likely to impact on terms and conditions such as bank holidays. Before this case, it was open for employers to argue that the reason for less favourable treatment in not granting bank holidays to employees who do not work Mondays was not solely on the grounds of their part-time status, but also because they did not work on Mondays. It will no longer be possible to advance this argument.

Claire Thomas, associate, Addleshaw Goddard

Personnel Today

Personnel Today articles are written by an expert team of award-winning journalists who have been covering HR and L&D for many years. Some of our content is attributed to "Personnel Today" for a number of reasons, including: when numerous authors are associated with writing or editing a piece; or when the author is unknown (particularly for older articles).

previous post
Dame Carol Black calls for urgent reform to workplace health services
next post
Department for Work and Pensions defends pay deal as two-day strike begins

You may also like

Fire and rehire: the relocation question

22 May 2025

Consultation launched after Supreme Court ‘sex’ ruling

20 May 2025

Minister defends Employment Rights Bill at Acas conference

16 May 2025

CBI chair Soames accuses ministers of not listening...

16 May 2025

EHRC bows to pressure and extends gender consultation

15 May 2025

Contract cleaner loses EAT race discrimination appeal

14 May 2025

Construction workers win compensation claim against defunct employer

9 May 2025

Zero-hours workers’ rights to be extended from beyond...

8 May 2025

Employment tribunal backlog up 23% in a year

7 May 2025

Ministers urged to outlaw misuse of NDAs

7 May 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+