Tribunal watch: pregnancy, harassment and victimisation
Three recent decisions with a common thread: ordinary workplace decisions about pay, conduct and grievances turned into discrimination findings because of how they were linked to a protected characteristic or to an earlier complaint.
Healing Waters (Company) Ltd
The employer did not pay wages for work done in the claimant’s final month, after she had told it she was pregnant. It did not defend the claim or attend the hearing. The tribunal found unauthorised deductions from wages and pregnancy discrimination, and awarded the unpaid wages of £1,184.29 plus £1,600 for injury to feelings, including interest. The judge also noted the evidence that no written statement of employment particulars had been given, and said the employer came close to a financial penalty.
“The Tribunal grants a declaration that the respondent treated the claimant unfavourably because of her pregnancy contrary to section 18 of the Equality Act 2010.”
“The total award for the breach of section 18 is therefore £1,600.”
For employers: Pay what is owed on time, and never let a pay decision become linked to pregnancy or pregnancy-related absence. Give every employee a written statement of particulars from day one.
Thurso Hotel Ltd
The tribunal found that senior staff shouted and swore at the claimant over everyday incidents in the kitchen, and that this was direct discrimination and harassment related to protected characteristics including age, sex and race. It also found that her contract was ended because of perceived disability. The employer did not attend the hearing. The tribunal awarded £11,500 for injury to feelings, £1,032 for lost wages and £516 for failing to provide written particulars of employment.
“subjected the claimant to unwanted conducted related to her protected characteristics of age, and of sex and thus, subjected the claimant to Harassment in terms of section 26 of the Equality Act 2010.”
“the respondent shall pay to the claimant the sum of £11,500 in compensation for hurt to the claimant’s feelings”
For employers: Shouting and swearing at staff is more than a conduct issue: where it relates to a protected characteristic it can be harassment, and the employer answers for what its managers do. Set clear standards for shift and kitchen leaders and act on complaints quickly.
South Bank Colleges
The tribunal found that the college victimised the claimant after she had done protected acts under the Equality Act, and that she was constructively and unfairly dismissed. It found that failures over occupational health recommendations, safe duties, suspension, pay and grievance handling formed a cumulative course of conduct which destroyed trust and confidence. A later reconsideration recorded that the constructive dismissal was itself an act of victimisation. Remedy was reserved to a later hearing.
“The claim of victimisation under section 27 Equality Act 2010 succeeds.”
For employers: Follow occupational health advice, keep suspensions and pay under review, and resolve grievances promptly: a run of smaller failures can add up to a constructive dismissal. Take particular care with anyone who has raised a discrimination complaint.
Decisions can be reconsidered or appealed. We never publish the names of individuals. If a listing concerns you, or a decision has since been anonymised or removed, tell us and we will review it and remove it where appropriate. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. General information, not legal advice.