Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • Maternity & Paternity
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • Maternity & Paternity
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

MaternityLatest NewsFurloughPregnancy and maternity discriminationEmployment tribunals

Nursery worker dismissed while pregnant was discriminated against

by Ashleigh Webber 7 Feb 2022
by Ashleigh Webber 7 Feb 2022 The tribunal found the claimant had been unfairly selected for redundancy
Shutterstock
The tribunal found the claimant had been unfairly selected for redundancy
Shutterstock

A nursery employee who was dismissed at the height of the pandemic was discriminated against because she was pregnant, an employment tribunal has found.

Ms Topping was made redundant from Stepping Stones Nursery in Hoddlesdon, Lancashire, shortly after announcing her pregnancy. No other employees lost their jobs at the time.

Topping started working at the nursery in February 2020 and a few weeks later told her line manager, Ms Costello, that she was pregnant.

Topping’s evidence to the Manchester employment tribunal suggested that the owner of the nursery, Ms Mercer, was disappointed by the news. Costello allegedly said that Mercer would “come round to it” and other comments were allegedly made about whether Topping would keep the baby and about the baby’s father.

As the pandemic worsened in March 2020, Topping began to question whether she, as a pregnant woman, should be self-isolating. It was decided that she should take sick leave and would be paid Statutory Sick Pay.

She was called back to the workplace on 24 March to a meeting where the company announced it would have to reduce staff hours because fewer children were coming to the nursery. Topping was told that the company could not guarantee anything beyond 20 working hours per week and although she was already off work, she was asked to sign a contract that would reduce her hours from 37 hours to 20 hours per week.

She was also incorrectly told that she might have to pay back any wages paid to her via the furlough scheme.

“The claimant was presented with Hobson’s Choice, between signing the document or quite possibly having no job,” the tribunal’s judgment says.

“This was in the context of comments from the respondent’s managers about whether the claimant should, or wanted to, keep the baby and other negative inferences which were made.

Pregnancy discrimination

Pregnancy and maternity discrimination: Employment tribunal round-up

How to deal with pregnant employees and those on maternity leave in a redundancy situation

Automatically unfair dismissal

“The claimant was clearly reluctant to sign, and the tribunal considered that the she did not freely give her consent to the reduction in hours. She was given a letter which was not a standard letter, which had been drafted in haste and not even set out on the respondent’s headed paper as other letters were.

“The claimant was the only employee to have her hours formally cut and to get a letter like that, or any letter at the time, and to be asked to sign it there and then. In those circumstances, the tribunal considered that the claimant’s pregnancy operated in the minds of the respondent when it decided how to deal with her because the claimant was dealt with differently to all other employees. The only difference was that the claimant was pregnant.”

On 30 March Topping was placed on the furlough scheme and paid at 80% of 20 hours per week, despite the furlough reference date being 19 March 2020 when she had been contracted for 37 hours.

Toppings colleagues, who were also furloughed, were paid at 80% of 37 hours per week and suffered no reduction in hours or pay.

The nursery told the tribunal that it initially did not understand how the furlough scheme worked. However, the tribunal found that it did not subsequently try to rectify the mistakes it had made.

On 20 April 2020 Topping was told she would be made redundant. No mention was made of any selection process or redundancy criteria having being met.

When she had not received the redundancy letter by 24 April, Topping called Costello. Costello said that an “HR provider” had advised her to speak to Topping to explain the reasons for redundancy, and said that other colleagues had “out-competed” her in a selection process. Costello suggested that the selection process had been carried out on 19 April, but the tribunal’s analysis of the metadata for the selection document found it was in fact written on 24 April.

The claimant commenced an early conciliation process with Stepping Stones Nursey via Acas at the end of April 2020. After this point, the employer got other staff to sign backdated letters agreeing to reduce their hours from the conversations it had with them in March 2020.

Topping told the employment tribunal that there had been no genuine redundancy situation; that no fair procedures had been followed; that she had been singled out; and that, as a pregnant woman, she should have been treated as vulnerable to Covid-19 and suspended on maternity grounds rather than pressured to agree to a reduction in hours and pay.

“The tribunal noted that the claimant was dismissed whilst on furlough. Such action goes against UK government advice during the pandemic and, as has been found, there was no evidence of any saving for the respondent from a dismissal at the time,” the judgment says.

It found that terminating her contract and changing her working hours were “pregnancy-related detriment”.

“They were acts of unfavourable treatment and because of the claimant’s pregnancy. The respondent has not shown any other reason for them, and the tribunal drew inferences from the respondent’s failure to bring evidence of its reasons for such conduct to the effect that the respondent was either unable or unwilling to explain its actions,” the judgment says.

Compensation for unfair dismissal and pregnancy-related discrimination will be decided at a later hearing.

Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today


Browse more human resources jobs

Ashleigh Webber
Ashleigh Webber

Ashleigh is editor at OHW+ and part of the Personnel Today editorial team. Prior to joining Personnel Today in 2018, she covered the road transport sector for Commercial Motor and Motor Transport.

previous post
Half of paramedics suffering from burnout
next post
Degree apprenticeships: The key to skills and social mobility?

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may also like

Woman wins £15k payout following director’s treatment during...

5 May 2022

Can you reduce contractual sick pay for unvaccinated...

20 Jan 2022

Employers turn down half of flexible work requests...

15 Oct 2021

Pregnant employee awarded £10k after colleague accessed patient...

3 Sep 2021

Male CEO joked about betting on director’s pregnancy...

1 Sep 2021

Pregnant Then Screwed to give closing keynote at...

31 Aug 2021

Blog post alleges sexual harassment and misogyny in...

15 Jul 2021

NHS setting up network of pelvic health clinics

15 Jun 2021

Labour presses for stronger maternity redundancy protection

1 Jun 2021

Ministerial maternity bill will help ‘spectacularly small’ number...

11 Feb 2021
  • Apprenticeships are the solution to your recruitment problems PROMOTED | Apprenticeships have the pulling power...Read more
  • What it really means to be mentally fit PROMOTED | What is mental fitness...Read more
  • How music can help to ease anxiety at work PROMOTED | A lot has happened since March 2020, hasn’t it?...Read more
  • Why now is the time to plug the unhealthy gap PROMOTED | We’ve all heard the term ‘health is wealth’...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • Maternity & Paternity
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+