To send an employee to a client even though she refuses because of her religion?

I've been in a sort of similar situation before where we had a strict practising Muslim female from a ME country on secondment with us in London. She was receiving some 1:1 sessions to settle her into the team. A lot of these sessions were with men and she couldn't be alone in a room with them. We got around it by holding the sessions in rooms that opened out into an open plan working area that had women in and left the office door open. It was a compromise that everyone could work with. I just offer this up in case it is a solution that would work!

Wiccan isn't.

But anyway, my point is this person is following a particularly patriachal version of her religion and posters here are happily advocating that other women compromise their own career progression by sitting doing nothing to satisfy the dictates of this particularly patriarchal version of Islam, whilst their male counterparts can happily get ahead gaining more experience as they don't need to waste time doing this.

Way to hold back the women in an already male dominated tech field!

Disgraceful that women are advocating disadvantaging other women like, and to satisfy a demand of patriarchy too!

Nope. The Equality Act confers protected characteristics for disability, race, religion, sex, age, pregnancy. Reasonable adjustment in many cases is to avoid indirect discrimination - having a rule or policy which disadvantages anyone with protected characteristics. Indirect discrimination can sometimes be justified where the policy is intended to meet a legitimate organisational objective in a fair and reasonable way. But when considering the introduction of such policies, employers should consider whether there are any alternatives which are not discriminatory and have less of an impact. There is also an obligation to look for reasonable adjustment where such policies exist.

This is probably the best way, but the chaperone needs vetting. Why should the employer pay for this. What is their liability if the chaperone is hurt or whatever. At the same time, sending a colleague is also a waste of resources if it is a one person job.
Honestly, it’s tough, this person needs to let go. She can work somewhere where she stays put, like a high female or all female workplace where she will not be alone. Going to client sites is not for her. I am guessing she cannot take a taxi or a train either in case of being alone with a male/males….just nope not realistic. She can get an appropriate job for herself, she won’t be jobless. These religious rules are incompatible with lots of jobs.

There is the added compication that unless the OP is missing something major, very few (in any) womens* job descriptions will include "chaperone Muslim women as required" in there.

*The OG sort. Although part of me would be curious to see how sending a female-identifying but tackle dangling colleague would play out ?

All religions are patriarchal. It's just that most sensible people cherrypick the parts they want to follow.

The employer is only obliged to accommodate if the adjustment needed is reasonable. OP has explained quite comprehensibly in this thread why there is no reasonable adjustment that they can make.

I am also pretty sickened by the way there are posters on this thread prepared to shove under women under the bus with their ' chaperone' suggestions. Why should another woman have her own work life compromised by having to spend time sitting uselessly in the room with a woman who does not need her there for professional reasons? The Muslim women can choose to follow a strict interpretation of her religion if she chooses, and accept the consequences of that. Another woman should not be forced to compromise her own working life to suit a patriarchal religion. Its disgraceful that in 2025 in the UK women on here are actually supporting two women having their work life compromised to satisfy the demands of a strict interpretation of a patriarchal religion. Its not men being asked to sit uselessly at meetings is it? Men are not being adversely affected by this are they?

How many of those advocating this would actually happy to have to give up a day a week, or whatever, of their working time, time they will have to make up to meet their own job demands, to sit and do nothing just because Islam demands it?

It depends on whether it would be possible/difficult to provide operationally and OP says in a later post that the client coming in is not an option, so clearly not. I do think a review of what was agreed at interview and take up of the job is needed, so everyone is clear, but I would be getting some proper legal advice or as you say, handing over to HR if they have one.

This is pretty outing op
you could be hauled in to HR for this!

I feel for employees working under management like this. Who come to mumsnet to decide how to manage difficult situations rather than HR

Sorry my example wasnt good.

In a male dominated industry I’ve frequently been the only woman in the room. It’s an expectation. A reality of the job.

What are you expecting OP to do in that situation? Her clients are predominantly male

I would not class sending a (female I assume) chaperone as a reasonable adjustment. They would need to employ someone (financially impacting business) with that as their job description as I doubt many female colleagues would be happy having to spend time tagging along in those meetings at least once a week. Asking the client to come to them could lose them a client and impact the business. Those are not "reasonable adjustments".

OP should not insist. She should ask them if they are willing to reconsider and if not hand the issue over to HR and legal to deal with appropriately.

And there’s no way that randoms on the internet can know whether this is proportionate or legitimate. There are very few job descriptions which qualify for these types of exemptions under the law - they are strictly controlled, and there are many pitfalls OP could fall foul of if she’s not sure of her ground. She needs to be sure that the employee knew what the job entailed at interview and agreed to it, and she’d also need to demonstrate that it was operationally too difficult to find accommodation. I’d be getting proper legal advice rather than asking MN.

I'd tread very carefully OP and get advice from HR as soon as possible. A friend of my DS works in a club, a female Muslim applied for bar work. Staff were surprised, but didn't question it because they welcome anyone and they felt just because some is wearing a niqab was no reason to turn them down. On the first night it turned out she couldn't/wouldn't serve alcohol. She was told that serving alcohol is all the job entailed so if she wouldn't do it there was no job (I think reasonably) but there then ensued a long legal issue about making allowances, not pointing out what the job involved at interview, proving she couldn't serve only soft drinks, how she was poorly treated etc it's been really difficult as they work on small margins anyway without the overhead of sorting that out.

Reasonable adjustments are for disabilities.

There’s a lot of fairytale ‘law’ going on here.

So a chaperone maybe as a form of reasonable adjustment? And remember ‘reasonable’ is the important factor here. It’s not always possible, and if you can’t find anything that’s operationally reasonable then you’ve fulfilled your obligations under the Equality Act.

@FeministUnderTheCatriarchy actually people who areu Muslim believe you are born it so there's no choice

No they don’t. Employers can discriminate as long as it’s a proportionate act for a legitimate purpose, which is why in some jobs they can ask for certain ages or sexes. What this employee is asking for is ludicrous in the UK in 2025.

Religion is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. If a Muslim woman refuses to be unchaperoned with a male client, OP insists and the employee resigns as a result, they would have a case for constructive dismissal. OP should be looking to find reasonable adjustment, such as a chaperone or asking the client to maybe come into the office so that the employee is not alone with them.

"She shares her office with a male colleague and has no problems shaking hands with men... "

@GelatinousDynamo

She has shot herself in the foot right there. Big time.

Document every interaction/handshake she has, document the time spent in the office with the other (non-related) male, and then proceed to sack her.

She cannot selectively choose which parts of her religion suit her work life.

Either she is all in or she isnt. That she handshakes other non-related men is seen by "some Muslims" as a big no-no, but she does it.

So to claim she cant be in an office of other men is fucking utter horseshit.

Dont let the tail wag the dog. Give her one chance and if she refuses, sack her.

Its that simple. And before any claims I am being anti-Muslim/Islamic etc, I am of the same faith.

Not in her male dominated tech role, as OP has explained.

Yes, this. I’m a committed church-going Christian. I’ve never known any HCPs at church who could refuse to work on Sunday, or who would even think to ask if they could. It just isn’t a thing.

That is completely different!

I was arguing that a female muslim HCP can't refuse to provide a service to men because they are men. The law is clear that you cannot refuse to provide a service to someone because of their protected characteristic ( in this case their sex).

It is well established that HCP can consciously object to providing services which will end life ( such as abortion and I am sure if assisted dying is made legal then there will be an ability to refuse that too). That is entirely reasonable imo.

I would definitely expect there to be some women in the crowd at an Arsenal football match. I used to go to football matches with my husband regularly years ago and there were always some women.