Childcare minimum leave

Rodway v New Southern Railways Ltd (formerly South Central Trains Ltd) CA TLR 21 April

The employee gave notice that he wished to take one day’s leave for the purpose of looking after his able-bodied two-year-old son. The employer refused his request on the grounds that cover could not be provided for his absence. Nevertheless the employee did not attend for work and was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and given a formal warning. He brought proceedings in the employment tribunal claiming that he had been subjected to a detriment for a proscribed reason, namely disciplinary proceedings for taking parental leave, contrary to s47C(1) and (2)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Paragraph 7 of Schedule 2 provides: ‘An employee may not take parental leave in a period other than the period which constitutes a week’s leave for him under regulation 14 or a multiple of that period …’. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the appeal tribunal that ‘in a period’ is to be interpreted in the same way as those words in regulation 14(4), which clearly referred to the period of time actually taken as leave. Accordingly, the employee was not entitled to take parental leave to care for a child for a period of less than one week under the provisions in Schedule 2 to the Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No 3312), except where the child was entitled to disability living allowance.