Pregnancy ‘Played a Part’ in Redundancy Decision – Discrimination Ruling

Maternity leave is every expectant mother’s entitlement and, if you feel that you have suffered pregnancy discrimination, you should contact a solicitor without delay. The point was powerfully made by the case of a woman whose pregnancy played a part in her employer’s decision to make her…

Mar 21, 2023

Pregnant business woman 1024x683

Maternity leave is every expectant mother’s entitlement and, if you feel that you have suffered pregnancy discrimination, you should contact a solicitor without delay. The point was powerfully made by the case of a woman whose pregnancy played a part in her employer’s decision to make her redundant.

Having twice become pregnant, the woman took successive periods of maternity leave which together lasted over two years. Not long after returning to work, she became pregnant for a third time and asked for arrangements to be made for a further period of maternity leave. The decision to dismiss her on grounds of redundancy followed about two months later.

After she launched proceedings, an Employment Tribunal (ET) found that the main or principal reason for her dismissal was indeed redundancy. A decision having been taken not to progress the line of work in which she was involved, she was effectively in a pool of one and was not selected for redundancy because of her pregnancy. Her dismissal was thus not automatically unfair.

In nevertheless upholding her ‘ordinary’ unfair dismissal complaint, the ET found that there was no genuine or meaningful consultation process prior to the redundancy decision. The process involved merely going through the motions and was effectively a box-ticking exercise. There was a failure to give due consideration to whether there was a suitable alternative position that she could fill.

Also upholding her pregnancy discrimination claim under the Equality Act 2010, the ET found that she had established facts from which, in the absence of an alternative explanation, it was possible to conclude that her pregnancy played a part in her dismissal. The evidence gave rise to an inference that she would have been treated differently had she not been pregnant. If not agreed, the amount of her compensation would be assessed at a further hearing.

Cooling Off Periods and Retraction of Oral Resignations – Guideline Ruling

Large employers often have ‘cooling off’ policies in place which address the common situation of employees orally announcing their resignation in a stressful moment and subsequently having second thoughts. As an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling showed, however, such polices, once adopted, must be honoured. The case concerned a supermarket worker who was under strain at home due to her onerous caring responsibilities for sick and elderly relatives. During an understaffed night shift, she became…

Making Managerial Changes? Transparency is Always the Best Policy

When changes are being made to a company’s management structure, transparent consultation with those affected is always the best policy. An Employment Tribunal (ET) made that point in the case of a senior executive whose role was steadily reduced to the point where he felt that resignation was his only option. The man was employed as the operations director of a multinational business’s UK division. He was also one of the company’s statutory directors. The company was undergoing globalisation…

Workplace Safety – Anxious Shop Worker Succeeds in Unfair Dismissal Claim

Aggressive customers are the bane of many shop workers’ lives and those workers are entitled to have their concerns for their safety at work fully addressed by their employers. An Employment Tribunal (ET) powerfully made that point in upholding a retail worker’s unfair dismissal complaint. The customer assistant had been on sick leave for several months, suffering from anxiety and depression, prior to her dismissal. She was concerned about the risk of infection with COVID-19 at work and said…