7 Grounds for Refusing Flexible Working Requests: How to Challenge Unfair Denials
7 Grounds for Refusing Flexible Working Requests: How to Challenge Unfair Denials
Key points
- Know the seven statutory grounds that can be used to refuse flexible working requests.
- Be prepared with data and evidence to challenge each ground.
- Ask for a clear written explanation of the decision and the cost/impact assessments.
- Consider trial periods or phased implementations to test feasibility.
- You may have rights to appeal internally and to escalate to an Employment Tribunal if necessary.
Ground 1: Burden of flexible working request refusals due to costs
Extra costs to implement a flexible arrangement can be a valid reason for refusal, but you can challenge if the costs are unreasonable or not well-evidenced.
A key statutory ground is that granting a flexible working arrangement would place a burden of additional costs on the business. Examples include expenses for extra staff, overtime, shift premiums, technology licences, or hiring temporary cover. If the cost is disproportionate to the size and finances of the business, the refusal may be unfair.
To challenge this ground, gather cost estimates and explore cheaper alternatives, such as phased rollouts, trial periods, or temporary adjustments rather than a permanent change. Request a written explanation of the cost assessment and ask for opportunities to reduce expenses.
Collect financial records, budgets, and rosters to show whether the claimed costs are reasonable in the context of the business. If the employer cannot justify the figures, you can argue that a more cost‑effective compromise could work, such as a shared cover schedule or a shorter trial period.
- Identify and quantify the costs claimed by the employer.
- Ask for a breakdown and methodology used to estimate costs.
- Propose affordable alternatives (e.g., phased pilots, flexible but core hours).
- Step 1: Ask for the specific cost implications and how they were calculated.
- Step 2: Propose a phased trial or pilot to test feasibility without committing to full change.
- Step 3: Provide alternatives that keep service levels intact while offering flexibility.
Suggest a short trial period to test the arrangement and review costs after a defined period.
Ground 2: Detrimental effect on business, performance or service
Requests can be refused if they would negatively affect service quality, performance, or the ability to meet customer needs.
This ground covers situations where a flexible arrangement would directly harm the employer’s ability to operate, meet deadlines, or maintain quality. If staff are spread too thin, or critical processes rely on fixed hours, the arrangement could lead to delays or mistakes.
To challenge, request data on customer impact, service levels, or performance metrics that would be affected. Propose compromises that protect essential functions, such as maintaining core hours for key tasks.
Evidence could include client feedback, performance dashboards, or rosters showing gaps. Where possible, offer a compromise that preserves service levels while still providing flexibility.
- Ask for specific performance or service metrics affected.
- Offer compromises that protect core functions.
- Gather evidence of impact (customer feedback, performance data).
- Step 1: Identify the essential service requirements and the point at which performance would worsen.
- Step 2: Propose a structure that keeps critical tasks covered (e.g., core hours).
- Step 3: Document the impact with data and examples.
Outline which services or times must be protected to avoid worsening performance.
Ground 3: Inability to re‑arrange work to accommodate the request
If the business cannot rearrange tasks, duties, or coverage to fit the requested hours, this ground may be cited.
Many flexible working requests require adjusting who does what and when, but not all roles can be reshaped without affecting outputs. In some cases, changing shift patterns disrupts critical dependencies or contractual commitments.
To challenge this ground, map existing tasks, identify adjustable components, and show where a rearrangement would be feasible or not. Offer alternative schedules, such as compressed weeks or different shift patterns.
Evidence might include task lists, dependencies, and change‑management plans. If a feasible rearrangement exists, present it as part of your response.
- Document essential tasks and fixed dependencies.
- Propose alternative schedules or task reallocation.
- Provide a clear assessment of what cannot be rearranged.
- Step 1: Catalogue duties and identify which can shift without harming outputs.
- Step 2: Propose alternative work patterns (e.g., core hours, splits).
- Step 3: If no rearrangement works, explain why with specifics.
Show exactly which tasks rely on fixed times or staff to maintain service.
Ground 4: Inability to meet customer demand
A refusal can be justified if the requested flexibility would prevent the business from meeting customer needs.
If the business relies on consistent coverage during peak periods or on-site presence, a flexible arrangement might compromise customer service. This is a strong ground when customer demand patterns are predictable and critical to operations.
Challenge by providing customer demand data, peak period schedules, and proposals for alternative patterns that keep coverage intact during busy times.
Evidence could include customer surveys, service level data, or rosters showing gaps in coverage.
- Present data on customer demand and peak periods.
- Offer coverage strategies that maintain service levels.
- Collect customer feedback or service metrics.
- Step 1: Analyse demand curves and peak times.
- Step 2: Model alternative schedules and their impact on coverage.
- Step 3: Provide a data-backed rationale for protecting core hours.
Be realistic about what can be achieved and avoid breaching service commitments.
Ground 5: Insufficient work during the periods requested
If there is not enough work to justify the requested hours, this is a valid ground for refusal.
Some flexible arrangements fail because there simply isn’t enough work during the proposed hours. This is particularly common in roles with seasonal or variable demand.
To challenge, show historical workload levels, pipeline work, or projects that align with the proposed hours. Propose alternative patterns with known work that matches the hours requested.
Evidence could include workload reports, project plans, or timesheet data.
- Provide workload projections for the requested hours.
- Show any upcoming projects that fit the proposed pattern.
- Suggest conditional approaches (e.g., start with a trial period).
- Step 1: Review recent workload and future projections.
- Step 2: Align proposals with identifiable work.
- Step 3: Suggest a trial period to assess viability.
Propose a short trial to test workload viability before committing long‑term.
Ground 6: Planned structural changes to the business
If the business plans changes (e.g., reorganisations, closures, or role changes) that would affect the requested arrangement, this ground may apply.
If the company is planning to restructure or make changes that would undermine the requested arrangement, this ground can justify a refusal. It provides a temporary or longer-term reason depending on the nature of the plan.
To challenge, obtain a clear timeline for the proposed changes and assess whether a compromise could bridge the gap. Consider offering a staged approach or a review date.
Evidence could include internal communications, project plans, or board papers.
- Ask for timelines and milestones of planned changes.
- Propose staged implementations or review dates.
- Collect internal documents showing future plans.
- Step 1: Gather information about planned changes and timing.
- Step 2: Model how changes could be phased.
- Step 3: Propose a fixed review date or flexibility window.
Some changes may be temporary; ensure you understand the duration and review rights.
Ground 7: Inability to recruit or train staff to support the arrangement
If the business cannot recruit or train staff to cover the flexible hours, this ground can justify a refusal.
Providing flexible working hinges on having sufficient staff and capability. If hiring or training would be required to make the arrangement work, and the employer cannot do so, this ground may be used.
To challenge, propose training plans, cross‑training, or interim recruitment options. Request a commitment to recruitment or training as part of the final decision.
Evidence could include recruitment plans, training budgets, or staff availability data.
- Suggest training or cross‑training solutions.
- Request a commitment to fill the staffing gaps.
- Provide evidence of recruitment and training resources.
- Step 1: Review staffing and training requirements.
- Step 2: Propose concrete recruitment or training actions with timelines.
- Step 3: Assess whether the organisation can meet those requirements within a reasonable period.
If hiring would be required, set a clear short‑term plan and review date.
For more on Discover if you can appeal an employment tribunal decision, the grounds required, time limits, and the full employment appeal tribunal process. Essential advice for self-representing claimants., see here.
For more on Discover what happens at an employment tribunal hearing, from preliminaries to judgment. Learn the judge process, cross-examination, and legal arguments for self-representing claimants in the UK., see here.
For more on Discover what an employment tribunal is, the process including ACAS conciliation, hearings and remedies in employment law England. Learn step-by-step how tribunals work for unfair dismissal and more., see here.
Frequently asked questions
What are the seven grounds for refusing flexible working requests in the UK?
The seven grounds include: (1) burden of additional costs; (2) detrimental effect on business, performance, or service; (3) inability to re-arrange work; (4) inability to meet customer demand; (5) insufficient work during the proposed hours; (6) planned structural changes to the business; and (7) inability to recruit or train staff to support the arrangement. Each ground requires specific evidence and a reasonable, workable alternative.
How long do I have to challenge a flexible working refusal?
Time limits for challenging a refusal typically start from the date of the decision and can be up to three months, with possible extensions for exceptional business reasons. You should act promptly and seek advice early to protect your rights.
Can I appeal a flexible working refusal?
Yes. Most employers provide an internal appeal process. If the appeal is unsuccessful, you may have the option to take the matter to an Employment Tribunal, subject to time limits and eligibility.
What evidence should I gather to support a challenge?
Collect evidence of business impact, workloads, customer demand data, rosters, cost estimates, and any communications about the proposed arrangement. Also gather potential alternatives and trial proposals to show you are attempting to reach a workable solution.
What happens if I go to a Tribunal over a flexible working refusal?
If you go to a tribunal, you will present your case with evidence of unfair denial or discrimination. The tribunal will consider whether the employer acted reasonably in refusing the request, including whether there was sufficient evidence to justify the grounds used.
Need help navigating flexible working refusals?
If you’re facing a refusal, start by requesting a written explanation of the decision and your employer’s evidence. Consider an internal appeal and, if needed, seek guidance from ACAS or a local advice service.
This is not legal advice, this post is for information purposes only, legal advice should be from legal professionals only.
Recent Posts
