In reply to Keith:

But if that were truly the case, Keith, they would have cited one of the other fair reasons for refusal. Either (2) or (3) would have been entirely reasonable arguments to make if the school believed its ability to meet its timetabling obligations were truly at risk and would be much harder to argue against.

The fact that they've gone for citing "significant restructure" as their objection to the flexible working request is a red flag. It suggests very clearly that they understand that there are only so many reasons for rejecting a FWR and yet they have consciously chosen to argue one with a nebulous justification.

I fought a similar case when I was a union officer but the justification was "a detrimental impact on performance". I was able to prove that the manager had no evidence that there would be a detrimental impact on performance in the team (in fact, the evidence supported the contrary position - that performance would be improved by more flexibility) and that the refusal was based on institutional sexism (our member had childcaring responsibilities, too).

In that case, too, the employer could easily have chosen to argue that it wasn't possible to reorganize the work among other employees, but deliberately chose not to - implying that they were perfectly able to reorganize the work, as in this case.

Lots of good advice below but key one for appeal is to demonstrate options for ways it could work to the educational establishment. Sometimes it's refused because they haven't been able to think outside the box. If your friend could bring those thoughts then they stand a good chance but I would also suggest they look at alternatives to them being the person that drops the child off at nursery so that they are offering compromise to their situation too. If they are the sole carer then there's a different angle to the argument. My advice is always to go into these things with a collaborative mindset bringing workable options for the organisation to consider. If your friend needs support emotionally through this then Education Support have a free helpline 08000 562 561 where anyone in education can call and talk to someone.

Apologies in advance - I have my cynical head on today.

Is it possible that the restructure they refer to is a 'downsize' type restructure where teaching headcount is reduced? Are pupil numbers dropping? Their anxiety to remind her of the cut off for resignation could be their attempt to avoid a redundancy?

It would also explain their refusal of the request - if headcount is reduced covering for a flexible working request would be much harder.

In reply to Jacqueline:

I was thinking the same as schools do have specific dates by which staff have to resign by, but it depends on the role. My experience as a school governor is that Headteachers taking up a new role in September have to resign by 30 April, and teachers have to resign by 31 May; for roles starting in January, Headteachers have to resign by 30 September and Teachers by 31 October, and for roles starting in the summer term (April), Headteachers have to resign by 31 January and Teachers by 28/29 February.