Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Nurse sacked for refusing to work weekends wins appeal over ‘childcare disparity’ discrimination

Lawyers hail ruling as ‘landmark’ decision for working mothers

Chiara Giordano
Thursday 24 June 2021 13:01 EDT
Comments
Community nurse Gemma Dobson was sacked after not agreeing to work weekends because she had to care for her three children
Community nurse Gemma Dobson was sacked after not agreeing to work weekends because she had to care for her three children (Slater Gordon/PA)

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A nurse sacked for not working weekends because she had to look after her children has won a “landmark” legal appeal.

Gemma Dobson, a community nurse from Cockermouth, Cumbria, had worked fixed days because she had caring responsibilities for her three children – two of whom are disabled.

But following a review in 2016, North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation trust sought to introduce more flexible working and a requirement that community nurses work some weekends.

Ms Dobson was unable to work weekends because of her childcare commitments – and was subsequently dismissed from her role.

The 40-year-old took her former employers to an employment tribunal citing unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination, but was unsuccessful.

However, at a hearing of the Employment Appeals Tribunal in London, her lawyers argued she had only been compared with the members of her small team, rather than community nurses across the trust as a whole, in relation to the flexible working requirement.

This was upheld by judge Mr Justice Choudhury, who said women bear a greater burden of childcare responsibilities than men, which can limit their ability to work certain hours.

He termed this fact as “the childcare disparity”, which he said employment tribunals “must take into account if relevant”.

Ms Dobson said she was “totally delighted” with the outcome of the appeal after her “utter disbelief” at the outcome of the original tribunal.

Employment lawyer Doreen Reeves, from Slater and Gordon, said: “It is established in law that there is a ‘childcare disparity’ as women are more likely to take the lion’s share of caring for children.

“Working mothers should not be tasked to prove this assumption time and time again when they bring employment tribunal claims.

“This important landmark decision gives a clear warning: working mothers with caring responsibilities should not be penalised if they are not able to work flexibly to meet business needs or demands of a service.”

The case will now go back before an employment tribunal to again consider the issues of indirect discrimination and unfair dismissal.

A spokeswoman for North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust said: “The trust notes the judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal.

“The trust does not believe that it is appropriate to comment further at this stage given that the matter will return to the original employment tribunal.

“It is important to note that the Employment Appeal Tribunal did not find in its judgment that Mrs Dobson was discriminated against or unfairly dismissed by the trust, which is why the matter will return to the original employment tribunal for further consideration.”

Additional reporting by Press Association

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in