Hotel told to pay woman €14,000 for unfair dismissal

A department manager at a hotel asked a seven-month pregnant colleague if she ate too much Supermac’s or was expecting a baby.

The department manager is alleged to have asked the bar manager the question the same day the woman was dismissed from her post on September 5, 2017.

Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) adjudication officer Ewe Sobanska has ordered the unnamed hotel to pay €14,000 for the woman’s dismissal after finding that she was discriminated against on gender grounds.

Ms Sobanska found that the bar manager’s dismissal was tainted with discrimination and that her pregnancy was a significant factor contributing to her dismissal. Ms Sobanska found no genuine redundancy situation existed at the time of her dismissal.

The unnamed bar manager told the WRC she found the department manager’s Supermac’s comment “inappropriate and offensive”. Earlier that day, the woman had informed the hotel’s general manager that she was pregnant and due to have her baby at Christmas.

Later on September 5, 2017, the woman said she was called to the general manager’s office where a HR executive was waiting with the general manager. At the meeting, the woman alleged the HR executive told her they could not afford to keep her position any longer and that she was being made redundant.

The woman said she left work feeling embarrassed and humiliated. The woman had only started work at the hotel on April 3, 2017.

The hotel categorically denied that the bar manager was dismissed because she was pregnant. It emphasised that the bar manager did not inform the hotel of her pregnancy on September 5, 2017, and the decision to make her redundant was made on August 28, 2017.

The general manager claimed that she did not tell him she was pregnant on September 5, 2017, and she did not look pregnant.

The hotel is part of a 10-strong hotel group and the general manager told the WRC that it would be “ludicrous” for him to make an employee redundant after being informed of her pregnancy. He said seven staff members are currently pregnant and they are all able to negotiate the process.

The HR executive pointed out that nobody in HR would have permitted the employer to proceed with the redundancy if they were aware the bar manager was pregnant.

The HR executive said the complainant was “absolutely not” visibly pregnant.

The hotel stated that the decision to dismiss was taken solely on economic grounds and unrelated to pregnancy.