INCREASED PROTECTION FOR PART TIME WORKERS
Lanre Fakunle
A UK Supreme Court decision means it may be easier for part-time workers to prove they have been discriminated against. Our Head of Employment Law Lanre Fakunle looks at the ruling.
In a simplified term, the UK Supreme Court decision in Augustine (Appellant) v Data Cars Limited (Respondent) means the ‘dust’ is now settled. The iota of truth in the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision in “Augustine” is that the protection alluded to a Part Time Worker (PTW) is not limited or confined to proving or showing that less favorable treatment during employment, occurred ONLY because of their PTW status. The fact that this status played an effective or significant cause of the treatment is more than sufficient.
The Supreme Court has ruled that, while the 2000 Regulations prohibit less favourable treatment of part-time workers where their part-time status is an effective cause of the impugned treatment, crucially it need not be the sole cause.
Historically speaking, the development in “Augustine” has posed many challenges to judges. A number of times, they have found themselves in a very uncomfortable situation on how to decide cases where the facts and evidence of “less favorable treatments” were not directly obvious or straightforward, most especially, where “the less favorable treatment” intertwined with some other probable circumstances or arguable factors.
Therefore, Lady Simler and her team, having spent considerable time and hard work to debate on the letters of law, and having critically analysed previously held decisions at the Employment Appeal Tribunals and/or Courts of Appeal, have reached a lasting outcome.
The confusion posed in “McMenemy”, an earlier case in the Court of Appeal where it was ruled that it was required that less favourable treatment of part-time workers must be SOLELY on the grounds of that part-time status has, of course, not helped matters. However, this can for now be put to bed.
“Augustine” now clears the way, and it is concluded by this recent outcome that, the ‘PTW’ provisions do require that less favorable treatment argument must be justified otherwise it is unlawful to treat any PTW less favorable due to the nature of their job when compare with the Full Time Worker (FTW).
It is worth saying though that, the Regulations provisions do require that “pro rata principle” need to be applied to determine whether a part-time worker was treated less favorably than a comparable colleague or counterpart who is a full-time worker unless it is inappropriate. In other words, a treatment without justification.
