London Underground discriminated against single mother
This report relates to 1 case(s)
-
expand disabled
Edwards v London Underground Ltd (No. 2) [1995] IT/04813/93 (0 other reports)
Following remittal from the EAT to reconsider the issue of the pool for comparison, a differently constituted London North industrial tribunal (Chair: E M Prevezer) in Edwards v London Underground Ltd (No.2) comes to the same result as the original tribunal and rules that new rostering arrangements introduced as part of a £10 million cost-saving plan indirectly discriminated against a female train operator, who was a single parent. In the tribunal's view, the proportion of female operators who could comply with the new arrangements (95.6%) was "considerably smaller" than the proportion of male operators (100%).
View the full article today
Register to read this article
Already an XpertHR user?
Log in
