HELP!! Reason for declining a flex work request - "Your job was full time so it must be a full time role"???????

[JimmyChoo17]

The main reason for declining my request to reduce my hours by just 2 days a month was that the job i was doing WAS a full time job which then had full time maternity cover......therefore it must be a full time job now... .now I can see why he feels that he can get away with stating that however there have been changes to my role since starting it 4 years ago so I have plenty of flex in my role to lose the time and my request is more than feasible based on evidence and facts rather than a vague statement like that. He follows up saying the whole dept is busy - but thats not something I can change as we are in roles where that we cant impact eachothers workload. Shouldnt my appeal be looked at my role and my impact not just a general sweeping statement?

Now looking at his reason - its silly as all full time to part time requests are made about FT jobs..?!?! And the cover for my job would obviously be a full time position for that reason. I understand companies can decline these requests but only where they can provide evidence of it not being feasible.

Without having to go into details but all you need to know is that my request is feasible and that they would not need to employ anyone to make up those lost hours......what do you think to that reason, have you been given the same reason and how would you react in an appeal letter?

My legal lines were the effect on customer service, quality and performance and inability to provide cover.

It sounds very much to me that this reason is NOT a valid business reason for refusing a flexible working request.
I would respond by explaining how your role has changed. Try to think of potential problems, were your role to be reduced to part-time and then give valid ways to overcome these problems.
On the face of it this is a direct breach of the Equality Act. He needs to give a VERY good business reason for refusing you, or he could be guilty of sexual discrimination on the grounds that you're a women and has given birth.

Thanks, I think so too!
They have still been noble to provide details as to why he thinks one reasons apply. I have come up evidence as to why it would work and there are no real issues o I'm just waiting to hear back from my appeal letter now....they guy who is dealing with the appeal tho is going to my managers (who rejected it) for further info but is away for 2 weeks now? But how can he meet with me within 14 days if he's not there? Plus talking to those managers for the answer I should add...seems a complete conflict of interest.

If they had a valid reason I'd get it but it seems very unreasonable to me.

Lol sorry so many typos there with rush typing I'm going to repost....

Thanks, I think so too!
They have still been unable to provide details as to why he thinks the legal reasons apply. I have come up with fact based evidence as to why it would work and there are no real issues by my slight reduction....so I'm just waiting to hear back from my appeal letter now....they guy who is dealing with the appeal is going direct to my managers (who rejected it) for further info but he is now away for 2 weeks?!? But how can he meet with me within 14 days if he's not there? Plus him talking to those managers for the answer I should add...seems a complete conflict of interest.

If they had a valid reason I'd get it but it seems very unreasonable to me.

The two managers involved have voiced their dislike of children and I've even been asked about future babies!!! I have pulled them up on this but they have said breeding has not been a factor in the decision making process....