From experience of being a manager in a supermarket on a similar shift pattern is that the employer don't have to do anything here. I'm guessing she is contracted to certain hours, so once they wanted to move the shift pattern to the later hours, they should have consulted with employees who would have consented. If an employee did not consent to the new contract then the employee couldn't do much about it unless they went down a redundancy route.
Employer doesn't have to do anything about how people get to and from work outside of work hours.
You are both correct, but it feels very much as though you shouldn’t be.
Employers should have a duty of care that extends beyond the specific contracted hours. In this instance the store is a minimum 20 minute walk to the closest residential area and the route is along a road lined with industrial units.
...
They do have a duty of care for staff travelling to and from work - it's been tested and confirmed in court.
But like I suggested before it's kind of hard to take any enforcement in situations like this - if they don't want to do anything then it's more of a case that if something happened they could get in trouble after the event.
And having read this - it would have to be temporary or irregular for it to avoid tax and NI implications (primarily for the employer)
https://smallbusiness.co.uk/providing-transport-for-employees-261533/I’d seen the stuff you linked there, and as you say it is more relevant to occasional late working beyond normal end time.
I can’t find anything that supports the idea that the employer can be compelled to either provide transport or alternative work.
It depends on how they went about the change of hours. If it was a proper contract change, consultation etc, then the employee isn't in a position to ask for transport. They should have voiced their concerns when the change was first mentioned or during the process of the change.
Author