Asking pregnant woman if she was coming back to work before maternity leave was 'discrimination'

An employment tribunal has ruled that asking a pregnant woman whether she is coming back to work before she goes on maternity leave is discrimination.

Laura Jo Duffy, a PA at Barnet, Enfield & Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust in North London since 8 September 2008 has successfully sued the health service.

The NHS worker claimed that her boss said he wanted to discuss her “future plans” and at the same time nodding (or gesturing) at her stomach with regard to her pregnancy.

A tribunal in Watford heard that a colleague, Ms Cleasby, asked Laura Jo Duffy if she had informed managers that she would not be returning after maternity leave.

Ms Duffy claimed to never have said what her intentions after the leave were but was accused of planning her baby to gain a promotion.

The tribunal ruled that Ms Duffy is now owed compensation after the comment was determined as a "stereotypical assumption about new mothers not returning to work".

The NHS worker earned up to £25,000 a year at the time and was told in August 2019 that her salary would be increased.

The tribunal also heard that Ms Cleasby allegedly informed staff members about the claimant’s pregnancy and that “she shouldn’t have a band 5 because she’s going on maternity”, “she’s not going to come back” and “what is she going to do if other people get what they want and she doesn’t”.

The tribunal also heard "the reason why Ms Cleasby said these things is that she was annoyed and upset about what she perceived was the Claimant’s unfair preferential treatment."

The comments brought into question included Ms Cleasby saying: “have you told Jackie that you won’t be coming back after maternity?”, "How “was [Mrs Saunders] funding the change”; other people would have their “jobs cut” and “staff weren’t happy”, “you are naive to think you are getting a band 5”, “you planned your pregnancy well”, “don’t be so sure of yourself’; you have nothing in writing”; and “don’t count your blessings”.

Employment Judge David Maxwell said: "The question posed to the Claimant as to whether she had told Ms Liveras she would not be coming back after maternity leave was not based on anything the Claimant had said to Ms Cleasby about her intentions, rather it involved a stereotypical assumption about new mothers not returning to work.

"The comment about the Claimant having planned her pregnancy well, involves the proposition that in becoming pregnant, she was motivated by the desire to obtain a workplace advantage, which was a most unpleasant comment to aim at the Claimant in these circumstances with a high risk pregnancy.

"Mr Beaton made a clumsy enquiry and the Claimant was right to think this inappropriate. The obligation on the Claimant to inform her employers about her intentions was a long way off and he ought not to have referred to this at all. These three acts were (individually and cumulatively) unfavourable treatment because the Claimant was pregnant."