Ms Perkins (the Claimant) was employed as head of Enforcement Local Taxation in the Helmshore office of MH Ltd’s enforcement company (the Company). The Company restructured its enforcement services so that work in Darlington, Epping and Birmingham transferred to Helmshore.

As a consequence of this change, Ms Perkins was told that she would have to travel to these other offices, prompting her to raise a grievance against that requirement. The Company stated that such travel could be limited to one day per month, but if this was refused the options were (i) enforcement of the changes; (ii) fire and rehire under a new contract; or (iii) redundancy. Ms Perkins confirmed that if her employment were terminated, she would advance down the redundancy route.

Ultimately, Ms Perkins was dismissed by reason of redundancy. Ms Perkins claimed:

The Employment Tribunal (ET)

The ET upheld both of Ms Perkins’s claims, accepting that:

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)

On appeal, the Company was successful for the following reasons:

Implications for Flexible Working

This case highlights important considerations for employers regarding flexible working, such as:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *