ABSTRACT
This defence applies to jobs such as on oil rigs or building sites. It is contended that there is no need to provide separate sleeping blocks. Just as the provision of individually separate toilet facilities should suffice, so should the provision of individually separate rooms or separate dormitories. Such an interpretation would greatly limit the scope for a successful defence under this section. This is important as many such jobs, often short term and moving from place to place, are in areas where the proportion of women workers is extremely low. While it is not suggested that this interpretation will cause an influx of women into such jobs, the law should not make it easier for employers to resist any female entrants at all. The section is a rare example under the legislation of a cost defence being admissible. Clearly, what is reasonable expenditure will depend on the total size of the workforce, the numbers of men and women, and the likely duration of the work in that location. Tribunals will have to balance the right to be free from discrimination against a plea of financial hardship, which places them in what is potentially an uncomfortable position.
