Overtime demands thrown out by tribunal

A mother who was sacked for refusing to work 16-hour shifts at Heathrow airport because she needed to look after her baby has won a landmark employment tribunal case.

The tribunal found that she had been unfairly sacked because the long hours discriminated against her on grounds of her sex. Ms Cowley, a single parent, said working back-to-back shifts meant getting up at 5:00am to prepare her baby's food for the day, getting to work for 7.45am and not finishing work until 10 or 11:00pm. She said she then went to bed at one in the morning, waking again at five the next morning.

Her contract required her to work eight-hour days, but the problems arose when her employer, South African Airways, insisted she worked compulsory overtime.

The tribunal ordered the airline to pay Ms Cowley three years' pay and criticised its "wholly unreasonable demands" over working hours.

Employment law expert Jonathan Swift believes the ruling will have an effect on employment practice across the country: "In practice, I'd be surprised if employers think twice about employing women with childcare responsibilities.

"I think employers would look at a situation like this to see what they can and cannot do in regard to their workforce."

Ms Cowley voiced her concerns about the dangers of driving across runways in a state of extreme tiredness, saying after the outcome: "People don't realise the damage long hours can do to your life."

The tribunal ruling noted: "The respondent's working practices would cause concern to the general public, if known, whereby somebody working a 16-hour shift was driving a vehicle airside with the potential risk to safety of aircraft passengers."

Gary Cutlack