Interesting. Why would she need to resign? The appeal letter I believe should’ve state around the fact that they have already made the accommodation until the end of term so why can’t this continue into September?

In reply to Sian:

The 'Has to resign' comment is either a Freudian slip or a misunderstanding of the law.
However because they have agreed short-term does not automatically mean they have no good reason to not agree longer-term

In reply to Peter Stanway:

What are her alternatives though? If she can't make it to work on time because of childcare? Its only 3 times a week and not every week. I've also read her contract which states "work the hours that the college requires of you". Can this be her main appeal argument as there is no actual start time its just an expected start time of 7:45?

Thank you

In reply to Claire:

It’s only three times a week isn’t a good argument when there are only five days in a week :-)

Her best argument is based on why they can make it work for 3-4 months but not long term. What temporary solutions they can put in place and why these can’t be permanent.

What is she supposed to do at 7:45. If it’s a key task ( reception, registration, class set up) it may be different to if it’s a task that can be done anytime.

The contract may help her but I wouldn’t use that as my main Hope here.

In reply to Keith:

Thanks Keith. I believe its classroom set up and then a duty (but that could be swapped for an alternative duty, especially when we are talking about Sept). At the moment she is doing another role until she can return to her job share as a class teacher in Sept, This is why they can accommodate her times now. Do we just appeal and then what if its refused again. What are her options then?

In reply to Claire:

Do they have a reason why it can be done now but not later. ( may or may not be a good one)

Yes appeal. See where they go. There is a restricted range of if legal reasons why they can say no. Make sure they are using one of those.

If they still reject it then it’s a game of brinkmanship. She could seek to take legal action but would heavily depend on reasons for their refusal.

If she doesn’t then her current contract stands and her hours haven’t changed. But hopefully both sides seek a compromise.

In reply to Claire:

Welcome to the Community, Claire.

In reply to Keith:

(Sorry the last post should have started with “So” rather than “Do”

In reply to Keith:

Reason for refusal was due to a restructure, but haven't clarified what the restructure in Sept is.

In reply to Claire:

They need to clarify. Just saying planned restructure is insufficient.

Hi Claire, What is the reason for declining and how this was justified? By law, employer can turn down flexible working request if: it will cost too much they cannot reorganise the work among other staff they cannot recruit more staff there will be a negative effect on quality there will be a negative effect on the business’ ability to meet customer demand there will be a negative effect on performance there’s not enough work for you to do when you’ve requested to work there are planned changes to the business, for example, your employer plans to reorganise or change the business and thinks the request will not fit with these plans Also, if there is planned restructure they should clarify what it would look like. I believe if they plan restructure in September the formal announcement and consultations will be conducted? "has to resign" complete misunderstanding of the law....

There are eight grounds upon which a flexible working request can be refused:

1. a burden of additional costs on the employer;
2. a detrimental effect on the ability to meet customer demands
3. an inability to re-organise work among existing staff;
4. an inability to recruit additional staff;
5. a detrimental impact on quality;
6. a detrimental impact on performance;
7. an insufficiency of work during the periods the employee proposes to work.
8. an employer can also refuse a request because they are planning significant structural changes to the business.

In this case, the employer seems to have chosen to use number 8, which is an unusual go-to for a school because - let's be honest here - there's only so much a school can do to re-structure itself when it comes to its hours of business.

However, the fact that they have chosen to reject the application on these grounds alone is a huge advantage to any appeal. After all, by choosing to cite only one of these grounds they have, effectively, ruled out all of the others as grounds for refusal and managed to choose one that is easily challenged.

A significant structural change to a business, after all, should be the subject of consultation, which will involve - in a school - the unions representing the employees. I suggest she engage with her union representative as a matter of urgency because the union will be very interested to hear not only about the refusal of flexible working on very shaky grounds but also about apparent plans for a "significant restructure" of the business which its members have presumably not yet been consulted on and which it would very much like to hear more about, given that the plans are obviously so well advanced that the school is able to say with such certainty that it cannot possibly accommodate a 15 minute later start for a sole teacher in the new structure.

Also, a union rep is going to leap upon the suggestion that she therefore have no alternative but to resign as a nice little constructive unfair dismissal tied up in a neat little bow (it isn't, of course, but schools rarely have the HR know-how to push back against a union rep with a good case).

Basically, there are a lot of ways to make life sufficiently inconvenient and dangerous for the school in this scenario that they will almost certainly be forced to capitulate to the FWR on appeal. But get the union involved now.

If she's not a union member, she'll need to make these arguments herself, which will be harder to push through (although she still ought to be able to - it's just that not having the union's legal team peering over your shoulder makes it much less threatening to the school).

Join a union, folks.

I presume the 'has to resign by 19 April' comment was actually meant to be 'if she chooses to resign, she must hand her notice in by 19 April to leave at the end of July' given that teachers have to give a term's notice. Poorly worded by the school.

In reply to Robey:

Robey said:

Basically, there are a lot of ways to make life sufficiently inconvenient and dangerous for the school in this scenario that they will almost certainly be forced to capitulate to the FWR on appeal. But get the union involved now.

I don't think this is necessarily the case at all. A school is one of those organisations that has some very strict timetables (literally) to work to and some of the flexibility that other organisations enjoy just doesn't exist. I wouldn't be going into any appeal / negotiations with this mindset as I think its unhelpful and counter productive

Hi Claire

Schools arrange their schedules for September during the summer term - you could ask if this is the "restructure" they are referring too?

If a teacher is under the burgundy book, flexible working can be difficult to put into place when looking at timetables, directed time and PPA time etc, albeit not impossible. I know we have not always been able to accommodate requests to come in a little later or leave a little earlier for school runs if we do not have the staff to cover this, however, that would have been the reason given for the request being refused. Where other staff have been willing to cover duties we have agreed the request.

Also, following on from what Jackie has said, if under the teacher's T&Cs, the resignation date to leave at the end of the academic year is 31st May - unless there is some other local/contractual agreement in place of course.


When the appeal has been unsuccessful, we have had staff attempt the grievance route. Most of the grounds are "thrown out" as they have been heard under appeal, however, we have heard/investigated claims of sex discrimination when the flexible working request is due to childcare.