Indirect Sex Discrimination to be Weighed Against Aims of Business?

In the case of XC Trains Ltd v CD & Anor the tribunal held that account should be given to the legitimate business aims of the company when judging indirect discrimination.

In a Judgment handed down on the 28th July 2016 the Tribunal allowed an Appeal against a decision that the Claimant had suffered indirect sex discrimination because there was a requirement to be able to work over 50% of rosters and on Saturdays, which was a Provision, Criterion and Practice (PCP) that put women and the Claimant at a disadvantage. Appeal allowed and remitted to a fresh Tribunal.

In XC Trains the Claimant was a female train driver with children, and found it difficult to meet with her obligations due to childcare arrangements. She made various claims in relation to this.

The Employment Tribunal found that a PCP which required train drivers employed by the First Respondent to work at least 50% of their roster and on a number of Saturdays put women at a particular disadvantage. The Claimant won her claim for sex discrimination and the First Respondent appealed.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the appeal.

They held that the Employment Tribunal had not erred in law by finding that the PCP put women in particular at a disadvantage but the ET had failed to weigh the legitimate aims of the business against the discriminatory impact against such employees. The claim was therefore remitted to a fresh ET to decide whether the discriminatory PCP was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.