WFH not allowed for office part-time workers

[JessicaLN]

Myself and 3 other colleagues work 3 days a week. Full time colleagues and a couple who work 4 days a week in our department have been allowed to work from home for one day a week since our return to the office after Covid. Management stated that part-timers could not WFH and an exception was made for the members of staff who work 4 days. Just wondered if anyone had any thoughts on this. Doesn't really seem fair and myself and one other part-timer were thinking of requesting one day WFH a fortnight, so one in 6 days. Percentage wise that seems fair compared to others. Colleague says as we are technically not being given the same "benefits" as full-timers it is discrimination. We thought this may be a temporary thing so didn't make a fuss at the beginning but it now seems to be a permanent arrangement. All of our jobs can be performed remotely as they were for 18 months during Covid. Any advice welcomed, thanks

Depends on what contract you signed I'd imagine. They'll be able to argue that the full time workers are effectively filling a different role so can have different contractual obligations.

If your contract says that you are office based then your employer is under no obligation to allow you to WFH. I guess the thinking behind it's that all staff are in the office for a minimum of 3 or 4 days. It seems lots of companies are requiring more time in the office which is a bit difficult for those who have made decisions around the expectation that WFH would be a permanent thing. Your suggestion seems sensible and is certainly worth pursuing.

Presumably it's because the full time and 4-day-week workers are all still going into the office for 3 days a week. Which is the same as PT workers who work 3 days.

You can ask, but there’s no obligation to allow wfh. It’s 3 days in office minimum at our organisation, for all staff.

Part timers can legally not he treated less favourably than full timers. Working from home, unless frequency is recorded in someone's contract is an informal agreement though, so although it might seem unfair they aren't technically doing anything wrong regarding employment law.

Are all full timers male and part time females if so might be able to claim sexual discrimination. But if mixed probably not.

Yes, this is classic indirect discrimination. It actually doesn't matter what contract you signed - you are protected from discrimination from the minute you commence work.

Your employer has enacted a policy which will discriminate against female workers. This is because female workers are recognised to most likely to work part time due to caring responsibilities. The part time (female) workers will have less favourable conditions than the full time (male) workers.

It doesn't actually if the part time workers in your particular case are a mix. The law says it's is indirect sex discrimination to have a rule, policy or practice which someone of a particular sex is less likely to be able to meet and this places then at a disadvantage to the opposite sex

It doesn't actually if the part time workers in your particular case are a mix.

What if all the staff are female? Genuine question. I've just started as a union rep but not had the full training yet. This is a subject that potentially may rise with us.

Something similar happened at one of my relatives workplace. A part time worker made a very similar argument to their management.

As a result, those on full time work were told they then had to work in the office 100%. The whole office then gave the person who complained the cold shoulder, and she left after a couple of months due to the terrible atmosphere. But the key point was her argument was accepted (I’m assuming after HR had checked it out and found it to be correct), so I think you’ll have a good case regarding discrimination.

This happened in our office too.
One person really kicked off and we all lost the right to WFH

Of course it’s fair. You only work 3 days anyway 😂

I’d complain, I’m 4 days so I get 4 weeks in 5 with a day at home. The 3 day workers get 3 weeks in 5 with a day at home. It should be equal %!

You need to look at the policy rather than the workforce. It's the policy that is discriminatory against a protected characteristic.

I'd say it depends on whether the policy says worker can work for example 50:50 at home:office, or whether it says all staff should be in the office 3 days per week.

We have 60% office attendance at our place which means part timers get days at home too. Are you in a union?

We have one part timer who if my line manager gives her an inch she takes a mile and really abuses wfh.

She comes out with every excuse under the sun why she has to wfh more often than not and or why she can’t possibly work a full day (looking after a sick child her children are 12 and 20, her cat has to go to the vets etc etc) and even when in the office or at home she is forever having to nip out for this that or the other. Too busy to take a lunch break so finishes early one day. Another day she wants to split her hour lunch time into two halves (one half for an eyebrow wax the other half is to meet a 12 year old out of school). We and our customers never know where she is, when she is meant to be available half the time.

I also work pt and another member of our team works ft and we don’t abuse wfh as we see it as. privilege. She is also never flexible to come in for a meeting or to cover something, she will never compromise and is always scheming to get more time off and work things to her advantage etc literally all of the time.

We had one staff member who worked 2 days insist that they got to WFH one day a fortnight. Everyone else was pulled back into the workplace full time which didn’t go down well and everyone avoids them like the plague now.

At the end of the day, a lot of contracts before covid were working from the office and WFH some days was a welcome perk after the pandemic.

If you're part time then it sounds like you'll just have to accept working in the office.
Maybe find a part time wfh job.

@BeeBB I think every organisation has one of these, in one way I admire them for not giving a fig what anyone thinks but practically it puts pressure on others to carry the slack.

At my workplace there’s a minimum percentage of time in the office, applied to all job patterns, so everyone is treated equally.

Ours was managed out.
Office is much more pleasant now.

I think there's no harm requesting to wfh once a fortnight to be equivalent to the full time workers. But if they refuse and you keep pushing, as others have said they may just make everyone come back into the office.

Sounds like the management are stuck in the past.

I’m absolutely astounded to read most of these replies! Its’s 2023!!

Whilst WFH isn’t a right, to treat PT workers differently is blatant sex discrimination based on the majority of PT workers being female.

I despair when I read things like this, especially coming from women-educate yourselves!

I assume most people on this thread are actually educated! Don’t be so bloody rude because people don’t share your opinion.