I am hoping that someone may be able to help me with a query one of our employees has:
They currently have a very nice 2 door BMW convertable company car which is due for renewal in November but is now on maternity leave and is struggling to get the baby car seat in and out of the back seat of the car. The employee would like to swap the car earlier than the policy states to get a family friendly car but the company are stating this is not possible - the agreement is 3 year replacements. She is asking if as her back is giving her concern and her child is only going to get heavier is there any H&S view on this.
I am in a dilema regarding this as she is not at work and this is not a work issue, although it is a company car. I also feel that as a relatively new mother who used the front seat of her car for the car seat why can't she but apparantly the only really safe place for the child is the back seat and she will not consider anywhere else.
I would appreciate it if anyone with thoughts regarding the way forward or experience of a similar situation could assist
Thanks in advance

Firstly let me state that this is not a H&S issue. The company provides the car for the employee to use in her employment and not for general use. Some employers allow a company car to be used by the employee for other than employment purposes and often charge a fee per mile for that usage. The company are under no obligation to provide a different vehicle simply because the one provided does not fit the baby seat. The vehicle provided meets the needs of the company as it stands so she has to accept the company's point of view.

Just to be helpful, why not see if any other employees with compay cars would be willing to swop. Im sure someone with a four door car wouldnt swopping for a nice little BMW 2 seater!!

*mind

If the vehicle was unsuitable because it didn't fit the work the person does, it would be an H&S issue. Unless her job is demonstrating baby seats, I can't see how the vehicle is unsuitable for the purpose for which it's been provided.

I'd say, lucky her, that her company car is a top of the line job. Even luckier her, that she's been allowed to hang on to it while on mat leave. If her back is bad because the driver's seat in her car is unsuitable she probably does have a case, but having just been through a pregnancy and delivery I think she'd struggle to isolate the cause of her back problem to the car.

Did she have the back problem before the pregnancy, and was it attributed to the car then? And did she report it as a car issue then? If the answer to both of these is yes, she's got a good case. Otherwise I'd suspect she's stuck with it.

There you go Hopeful I provoked a response for you!

Basically I have to agree with both Bob and Paul's answers, unless she is a director of the company or married to the boss she's got no chance.

Is there such a thing? ;-)

Thank you for all your responses, has helped me immensley. On another note - yes she is lucky with the car, I have never been able to have such a car from a company!!

Couple of points here:

A car is provided as your job involves travel, however Bob is wrong when he says the personal use doesnt come into it as it is a benefit in kind and the employee is taxed on the value of the benefit and the company will advertise the car as a benefit to attact personnel so personal use must still be considered.

The situation is a tricky one, because the problem the lady is suffering is not related to a work activity, many companies will change a company car to accomodate a health issue (reasonable adjustment) however the employee needs some proof that her condition is caused or made worse by the car.

As the baby seems to be the issue and the back problems an after thought as such, I can see why the company is reluctant. I would advise the employee to visit her doctor and then address the issue with her line management as they will hold the cards here.

Out of interest, could this become a problem on her return to work and decides to breastfeed, bringing the baby to work with her, say in the morning, getting someone to pick the baby afterwards - very very very hypothetical!

Interesting points, I'm not a lawyer so I'm offering these as discussion points rather than a legal opinion, but...


Neither her employer, nor any requirement of her job, is requiring her to do that.


I would consider the suggestion that men don't do childcare to be sex discrimination in itself!

Paul,

I am not sure what points you are trying to make. These are merely suggestions from a employment solicitor colleague. In order for there to be discrimination on the grounds of sex, the claimant has to show that he/she has been required to do something (or prevented from doing something) that a member of the opposite sex would do in the same circumstances. As men don't have babies, the lady in question might argue that e.g. the company's policy of only changing cars every three years discriminates against a woman who has a baby and who needs a change of car for that reason. There are of course a number of counter arguments and hence my statement that the claim may not succeed.

SafetyGirl,

From memory, women who are breastfeeding have no right to bring the baby to work. They can express milk and the employer has a statutory duty to provide clean, private facilities to allow that to happen and suitable storage facilities for the milk until the end of the woman's working day.

Paul,

No offence was taken at all and your points are very valid. My post is simply the view of an Employment Solicitor with many years experience, who feels there is a risk of a sex discrimination case. No more than that.

Regards.

DJ