Four Employment Tribunal victimisation claims that were successful in 2017 & 2018
Jennings v Ms Davinda Kaur T/a Adhara Hair and Beauty
Summary of claim: The Employment Tribunal found that Ms Jennings had proved facts from which it could conclude that her dismissal was an act of discrimination: that she had been dismissed only a few weeks after informing Ms Kaur that she was pregnant; that Ms Kaur had informed Ms Myercough on 8 April 2018 that she wished to only employ people without children; and that no meeting was held with Ms Jennings prior to her dismissal.
Compensation awarded: £22,013.83
AP Read v Aftala Norfolk Ltd T/a Papa John’s Pizza and Whitestone Norwich Ltd T/a Papa John’s Pizza 3400414/2017
Summary of claim: the Employment Tribunal held that Ms Read’s dismissal and the failure to carry out a risk assessment was conduct which was unfavourable treatment and related to Ms Read’s pregnancy.
Compensation awarded: £12,358.18
Ms H O’Brien v Circles Montessori Day Nurseries Ltd 3300306/2017
Summary of claim: the Claimant worked as an assistant manager at the Respondent, a nursery. In August 2016 the Claimant informed the Respondent that she was pregnant, and asserted that after this she was made to feel unwelcome should she decide to return to work or even continue working. The Claimant also gave evidence that the Respondent had, after she had notified it of the fact of her pregnancy, recruited an assistant manager on a permanent basis without the Claimant’s knowledge or input; this was the same position that the Claimant held and she was not told that this person was being recruited as maternity cover. She therefore assumed that she was being replaced, a feeling that was supported by the fact that she was not given the opportunity to attend staff meetings in November 2016 and felt isolated form her colleagues.
In an email dated 6 December 2016 Ms Lucas, the owner of the Respondent, wrote an email to the Claimant alleging that the Claimant had been pregnant when she commenced employment. This was, in effect, inferring that the Claimant had deceived Ms Lucas when she has commenced employment.
The Employment Tribunal, in a default judgment, upheld the Claimant’s claims.
Compensation awarded: £8,960
Ms C Kimberley v Calibre Building Services Ltd 2301151/2017
Summary of claim:The Employment Tribunal upheld Ms Kimberley’s claim for pregnancy and maternity discrimination (section 18 Equality Act 2010) in respect of the following:
- That, in the meeting on 20 December 2016, Ms Lowe accused Ms Kimberley of: lying by failing to telling Calibre of her pregnancy once she knew she was pregnant; lying about her pregnancy by failing to disclose her pregnancy before accepting the offer of employment; telling team members about her pregnancy before telling Ms Lowe
- Extending Ms Kimberley’s probation period for a second time on 20 December 2016 – the Tribunal found that there were significant references made by Ms Lowe to the pregnancy issues, and that she placed emphasis on some of these issues in determining whether to extend Ms Kimberley’s probation period for a second time. The Tribunal therefore found that Ms Kimberley’s pregnancy was an “effective cause” of her probationary period being extended for a second time
Compensation awarded: to be determined at a further remedy hearing
Miss A Parsons v Oswestry Equestrian Centre Ltd 1301514/2017
Summary of claim:The Employment Tribunal accepted the Claimant’s evidence and held that she was dismissed on 10 February 2017. The Employment Tribunal further held that the reason for the Claimant’s dismissal was her pregnancy – Mr Connell foresaw that the Claimant would be less useful and a potential liability for the Equestrian Centre because she was pregnant, and chose to dismiss her on this basis
Compensation awarded:to be determined at a further remedy hearing