Victory for the Police
by Jenny
I was reading through my Gazette yesterday and was particularly glad to read the employment law report detailing the Court of Appeal decision in Blackburn and anor v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police.
I must say at this point that I may be a bit biased as I have a partner in the police and have the misery of crossing paths with him in the mornings when he returning from a night shift and I am going out to work.
Now correct me if I am wrong but surely when people sign up to the police they realise that as the police are available 24 hours a day that there’s a good chance that if they’re on response/reactive they are going to, at some point, be required to work night shifts. Therefore if they are allowed to avoid night shifts because of childcare arrangements that’s surely a bonus?
Not in the above case. Female police officers brought a claim of indirect discrimination claiming that as they were excused from working a 24-hour rotating shift pattern because of their childcare responsibilities but did not receive the enhanced payments, which were received by those working night shifts, they were being indirectly discriminated against.
Thankfully the Court of Appeal has (in my view) seen sense and upheld the EAT’s decision that the legitimate aim was to reward those who did night shifts and the means of achieving that aim was proportionate. If those who didn’t work night shifts were rewarded anyway what would be the point?
I am quite confident that, given the option, my partner would give up an enhanced payment if he didn’t have to work nights. Can’t have your cake and eat it!
Similar Posts:
