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

[GelatinousDynamo]

I have a new employee in my team, she is a devout Muslim. She's been with us since January and there were no issues so far, she's getting along well with everyone and her performance was fine. I sent her an email on Friday afternoon to say that our client has now (finally) prepared all necessary documents and that she should go there and go over everything with them one day next week. She wrote me back today that she can't do that because only men work in the department and she can't spend the day alone with strange men (because of her religion).

AIBU to insist that she does her job and goes there or would that be religious discrimination? She shares an office with a male colleague and has never complained about it. She's the first devout Muslim I've ever had on my team and I honestly have no experience at all with such issues. She's the only one who has the necessary experience and isn't already scheduled elsewhere.

Reasonable adjustments are for disabilities.

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

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.

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 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.

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

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

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.

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?

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

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 ?

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.

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.

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!

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!

If you read all of my posts, I have pointed out that ‘reasonable’ is the definition here. The Act accepts that reasonable adjustment is not always possible, and if, for legitimate reasons, it cannot be found, then sometimes the only alternative is to let the employee go. But it doesn’t absolve the employer from the obligation to consider reasonable adjustment to avoid indirect discrimination.

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

Maybe they are doing what their husbands say ?

Yes, like believing reasonable adjustments only relate to disabilities for one.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/religion-or-belief-guide-to-the-law.pdf

Its 2025 and you think a moslem (or other strict faith) shouldn't go into a male dominated industry rather than the work set up adjustments to accommodate some staff restrictions?

I'm in the most male dominated end of tech in big consulting and even our most male dominated clients have women working for them hence my unsanswered question upthread about sector. IME clients themselves will often help accommodate a specific request or need for a meeting - of course you have to ask.

I am also surprised that a new employee is being sent out to a client without some form of buddy from the firm initially as standard practice (unless employed at fairly senior level) or that no swap is possible or that the onsite team from the OP's company can't assist.

Also wondering how the new employee knows there are no women working at this client.

It may well be there are no reasonable accommodations but that needs to be properly documented.

Also, I note the OP hasn’t said what her employer did with the male Muslim employees who refused to work with female managers.

Unless she wants a sex discrimination claim, her employer probably needs to do the same as they did in those cases. If she (or her employer) arranged for male employees to only work with men, she probably needs to arrange for this woman to only work with women. Edited to say: or only work with men according to the religious requirements laid down.

If the men were told they could either work with women or leave, the processes are already in place to deal with this request.

The OP was the buddy for the first couple of visits which is how they know there are no women.

I didn't mean that the client should pay someone to sit there during the meeting. But if there happens to be a woman in the next door office who would be happy to swap desks for the morning, why not ask her to do it? If there isn't, they can say no. Personally I would be delighted to do this kind of thing to support a Muslim woman in the workplace.

Also, I note the OP hasn’t said what her employer did with the male Muslim employees who refused to work with female managers.

Yes she has. He was let go.

@Diningtableornot the employee is going to the client's offices. OP can hardly demand that the client furnish one of their female staff to chaperone. They may not even have anyone female anyway.

Or the client could just refuse and say "thanks, but maybe we'll hire a company that doesn't need such fuss" ?

Then you'd have another chance at seeing what courts look like, suing the client for .... something or other.