As of April 6, parents of young children will legally be entitled to request working hours that allow them to balance the daily demands of office and family life. Employment law specialist Paul Archer considers what effect this new legislation will have on the hierarchy of work, as employees and employers face up to their new freedoms and responsibilities.

It is not difficult to see that the flexible working regulations may cause some difficulties for employers.

For example, if a number of employees were to request that they worked only during school hours (say from 9.30am to 3pm), this might have a severe impact on the ability to deliver a service for customers.

One can also imagine employers being concerned about setting precedents in that, if one employee is permitted to work flexible working hours, then others might expect the same.

The careful employer however, should not be caused difficulties by the new regulations.

Their obligation is only to follow a fair procedure in considering requests and then to put forward a business reason for the refusal of any particular request.

The procedure requires an initial meeting followed by a written decision and then an appeal hearing, which should also be followed by a written decision.

The grounds for refusal are as follows: (a) Burden of additional costs.

(b) Detrimental affect on ability to meet customers' demand.

(c) Inability to reorganise work among existing staff.

(d) Inability to recruit additional staff.

(e) Detrimental impact on quality.

(f) Detrimental impact on performance.

(g) Insufficiency of work during the periods the employee proposes to work.

(h) Planned structural changes.

These business grounds for refusing flexible working requests are broad and, in reality, it will not be difficult for an employer to identify a reason for refusal.

The key point is that the reasonableness or fairness of the employer's refusal is not open to legal challenge.

The employee cannot make a complaint to the Employment Tribunal (or anywhere else) about whether the

employer was reasonable in refusing their request on one of these grounds.

The grounds on which the employee can bring a claim are limited to circumstances where the procedure has not been followed or the employer has based their refusal on 'incorrect facts'.

The business grounds for refusal are generally matters of judgement rather than matters of 'incorrect facts' so it is difficult to see how employers will find their decision challenged at the Employment Tribunal.

Notwithstanding the above, on a cautionary note, employers should be aware that the refusal to allow women who are currently working full time to work part time may amount to an act of sex discrimination under the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act.

This is particularly relevant where women who have previously worked full time want to return part time after maternity leave.

The refusal of a request to work part time will need to be objectively justified and this objective justification can be challenged at the Employment Tribunal under the Sex Discrimination Act.

For further information on this or any other employment law matter, contact Paul Archer or Dawn Gallie at Lemon and Co Solicitors. Tel: 01793 527 141.