An IT manager has failed in his attempt to sue his bosses for sexism after being denied the opportunity to work from home to assist his wife with caring for their twins. Paul Macdonald claimed he faced discrimination when his employer, an international computer firm, refused his flexible working requests so he could help with childcare responsibilities.
Background of the Case
Mr Macdonald, from Glasgow, Scotland, worked as an IT Incident Manager at Computershare Technology Services, a role involving high-priority crisis management for global finance companies. He was required to work from the Edinburgh office, which had been redesigned to resemble a NASA control centre, with a hybrid schedule of 50% office and 50% home working. His commute from Glasgow took over two hours each way, as he did not drive.
In May 2023, the company's CEO encouraged employees to return to the office two days a week to stay competitive. Mr Macdonald submitted a flexible working request in February 2024, citing difficulties due to care responsibilities for his twins. He stated: 'It is becoming increasingly difficult to commit to getting into the office even with the low expectation of in office time. This is a result of the care responsibilities of my twins.'
Requests and Refusals
His initial request was denied, but he made another in February 2025 after the company increased office expectations to three days per week. In his request, he explained that his twins are neurodiverse, with autism and ADHD, making it challenging to meet in-office requirements. He noted that being in the office prevented him from helping with the school run during his break and raised concerns about returning home promptly in emergencies.
Mr Macdonald's wife, who was the designated carer and did not work, handled the school run: driving the twins to school at 8am and returning home at 8:40am, then leaving again at 2:30pm to pick them up. However, the tribunal heard that Mr Macdonald's breaks were only 30 minutes long, so even if he worked from home, he could not have completed the school run. His wife would still need to drive, as he could not.
Computershare had occasionally allowed Mr Macdonald to work from home to help with his twins, but this was not regular. During a meeting, he mentioned that permanent home working would allow him to intervene for about five minutes during coffee or comfort breaks if the twins had behavioural issues due to their neurodiversity. He added: 'The biggest factor is if the twins have a rough day when they leave school from 3pm until 8:10pm my partner has to deal with the kids as a carer, if I don't get home until 8.10pm that's a long time.'
Company's Response
Managers refused his request, citing a detrimental impact on performance and quality, but said they understood his circumstances and would accommodate when possible. They emphasised that physical presence aided collaboration, especially during crises. His appeal was also rejected.
In August, Mr Macdonald received a warning for not meeting the required nine office days per month, but after investigation, no further action was taken. The tribunal noted that another employee who applied for home working for health reasons in a non-critical role was also turned down for efficiency reasons in April 2024.
Tribunal Decision
Mr Macdonald lodged claims of sex discrimination and disability discrimination by association, arguing that his child's ADHD made him a victim of discrimination. However, Employment Judge Jacqueline McCluskey dismissed both claims. The judge stated: 'If [Mr Macdonald] had been permitted to work from home on a permanent basis, he may have been able to assist his wife for five minutes during his coffee or comfort break. This would depend if he was working on a high priority or time critical incident. [His] wife was also at home. The Tribunal was not satisfied that intervening for a few minutes, when he could, amounted to childcare obligations. The Tribunal also concluded that it was [his] wife who had the childcare obligations, not [Mr Macdonald]. She was the one responsible for the care of the children.'
