Navigating Childcare and Weekend Working – A Fair Dismissal?

Oct 4, 2023

A decision made by the Employment Tribunal has been recently reviewed where it was found that an NHS nurse with two disabled children was fairly dismissed. This was because of her refusal to comply with the introduction of flexible working patterns to her role. It has highlighted that a need for flexible working is not always to be applied too strictly and an employer’s needs as a whole must sometimes prevail.


Mrs Dobson was dismissed by the North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust (‘the NHS Trust’) in 2017 for her refusal to work a weekend once a month. Mrs Dobson was an NHS nurse with three children, two of whom are disabled. It had been previously approved that she could work on a flexible working pattern due to her caring responsibilities. When the new rostering policy was introduced to include some weekends, Mrs Dobson declined to be reengaged on the new terms and she was subsequently dismissed. Mrs Dobson brought a claim for unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination to the Tribunal.

Initially, the Tribunal dismissed her claims and in particular stated that the criterion introduced by the NHS Trust applied to both men and women. It was held that there was no evidence to show that women were at a particular disadvantage to men as other members in her team were able to fulfill the requirement. Mrs Dobson appealed on the basis that consideration had not been given to the greater caring responsibilities of women, and secondly that the pool of comparison should not have been limited solely to Mrs Dobson’s team but should have included all community nurses across the Trust. The appeal was accepted and remitted back to the Tribunal to be reconsidered.


After fresh consideration of the Tribunal’s decision and applying Mrs Dobson’s reasoning to all community nurses, the Tribunal affirmed its original decision that she had not suffered indirect sex discrimination, despite being put at a disadvantage. This was on the basis that although she was put at a disadvantage, the weekend working pattern was found to be a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of transitioning into a 24/7 service and treating patients with more complex needs at home.

The Tribunal took the time in their judgment to set out their reasoning and carefully evaluate the evidence. Notably, in order to accommodate Mrs Dobson’s refusal, other members of the team would have to compensate for this by working additional weekends. This would include requiring the time of more expensive senior nurses, who would then be unavailable for management issues. Mrs Dobson’s disadvantage was found to be at the lower end of the scale as, on the facts, it was found that some family childcare could be put in place.  In balancing the disadvantage to Mrs Dobson against the reasonable needs of the NHS Trust, practically, the only measure available was to terminate her contract.

It was noted that the NHS Trust had exhausted all alternative options to dismissing Mrs Dobson. In addition, a variety of ways to support her in working more flexibly was explored. However, all suggestions were refused by Mrs Dobson with no alternative solution presented. Therefore, the Tribunal found that the NHS Trust could not have reasonably exempted Mrs Dobson from this requirement, making the decision to dismiss her a reasonable and fair response.

Learning points

The Tribunal has set a clear message on an employer’s role in implementing a legitimate aim proportionately. The importance of an employer’s involvement in an extensive consultation process with the employee, to mitigate any resulting impact, has been emphasised.

This case serves as a reminder to all employers on the significance of handling discussions appropriately, while considering their own resources and economic pressures. It is always key to have comprehensive policies and procedures in place.

How we can help

With so many difficult factors to consider and bespoke procedures to follow, it is important to understand the right process when introducing new contractual terms and policies, especially if this could create disadvantage to a particular group. It is advisable to seek legal advice to help avoid lengthy and costly Employment Tribunal claims.

For further information, or to discuss the issues raised within this case, please contact us to speak to a member of our Employment Team.

This reflects the law and market position at the date of publication and is written as a general guide. It does not contain definitive legal advice, which should be sought in relation to a specific matter.

Darren Smith

Darren Smith

Partner, Employment Law

Bridget Bailey

Bridget Bailey

Trainee Solicitor

Latest News & Insights

All in a Day’s Work: Employment Podcast Series

Our Employment team bring you a monthly podcast covering all aspects of Employment law for businesses and individuals. You can browse our podcasts below…
All in a Day’s Work: Introduction to TUPE

All in a Day’s Work: Introduction to TUPE

In this episode, we discuss the basic principles of TUPE including when a transfer arises, the impact this has on employees and how best to prepare for a potential TUPE transfer.

Top Legal Insights


Contract Law

Material Breach of Contract

What is a ‘material’ breach of contract by a party to a commercial contract? This is a critical issue regularly considered by the courts. What constitutes a material breach and what are the remedies?

Property Law

Commercial Lease: The Financial impact on Landlord and Tenant

Coronavirus (COVID-19) and the restrictions now in place to control its spread, are having a significant effect on many business sectors.

Divorce and Family Law

Divorce in Lockdown: Can I get some discreet legal advice?

We have spoken to clients who are unfortunately experiencing some family issues, and would like to obtain expert legal advice, yet don’t know how...

Land & Property Dispute

Restrictive Covenants – The Price of Modification

Having identified that your land is burdened by a restrictive covenant and for the purposes of this article the covenant in question will be that only one residential building can be erected on the land. What do you do next?

Wills, Trusts and Probate

Why is having a will so important?

It is entirely up to you if and when you want to create a Will, but it is important to be aware of the consequences of not having a Will.

Award winning legal advice

Herrington Carmichael offers legal advice to UK and International businesses as well as individuals and families. Rated as a ‘Leading Firm 2024’ by the legal directory Legal 500 and listed in The Times ‘Best Law Firms 2023 & 2024’. Herrington Carmichael has offices in London, Farnborough, Reading, and Ascot.

+44 (0)1276 686 222


Brennan House, Farnborough Aerospace Centre Business Park, Farnborough, GU14 6XR

Reading (Appointment only)
The Abbey, Abbey Gardens, Abbey Street, Reading RG1 3BA

Ascot (Appointment only)
102, Berkshire House, 39-51 High Street, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7HY

London (Appointment only)
60 St Martins Lane, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4JS

Privacy Policy   |   Legal Notices, T&Cs, Complaints Resolution   |   Cookies  |   Client Feedback   |  Diversity Data



Our Services

Corporate Lawyers
Commercial Lawyers
Commercial Property Lawyers
Conveyancing Solicitors
Dispute Resolution Lawyers
Divorce & Family Lawyers
Employment Lawyers
Immigration Law Services
Private Wealth & Inheritance Lawyers
Startups & New Business Lawyers

Pay Online >

Please be aware that we have no plans to change our bank details. If you receive any indication that any of our bank details have changed please contact us before sending us any funds. We take no responsibility for monies you transfer into the wrong bank account.

© 2023 Herrington Carmichael LLP. Registered in England and Wales company number OC322293.

Herrington Carmichael LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with registration number 446245.