Pregnant worker awarded €19,500 for gender discrimination

A pregnant shop assistant has been awarded €19,500 in compensation after the Equality Tribunal found that her dismissal constituted gender discrimination.

Jennifer Somerville was employed by Gell Retail Ltd, now in liquidation, in Tallaght from Jul 19, 2010, to Mar 28, 2011.

During that time, she said, she had been praised by her store manager, identified at the hearing only as Mr G, for her continuously high sales. He had even suggested that she be promoted to assistant manager.

However, after Mr G left the company in Jan 2011, she said she heard no more about the promotion. She said that, after his departure, the store had managers from other stores standing in for short periods, including a woman identified as Ms N.

Ms Somerville told Ms N about her pregnancy on Mar 2, 2011. She was five weeks pregnant at that stage, but as they were about to carry out a stock-take, she was concerned about lifting heavy objects and climbing ladders in her condition. Ms N told the company’s general manager, identified as Mr S, about the pregnancy.

The next day, Ms Somerville was called to a meeting with Ms N, where she was reprimanded for having missed a section of stock and issued with a first written warning. Ms Somerville said she had no problem with the warning due to her mistake, but said that when she read the document, it contained references to previous warnings and to other concerns which she said were never raised with her and never took place. She refused to sign the document.

Ms Somerville said Ms N and Mr S asked her on a number of occasions if she would miss a lot of days during her pregnancy, about dates of appointments, and if she would return to work on a part or full-time basis.

The tribunal’s equality officer, Orla Jones, said it was “notable that the complainant advised the respondent of her pregnancy on Mar 2, the day before she was issued with the warning”.

On Mar 28, Ms Somerville received a phonecall telling her to come to another store for a meeting. She said that, on the call, Mr S told her she had breached company policy by using her mobile and the internet during work hours and that he was considering her dismissal.

She said she told Mr S at the meeting that she had only used her phone outside of her breaks with permission from her manager. She said she had only used the internet during her break or when the store was quiet and there was nothing to do and that she used the internet less than other staff. An assistant manager, identified as Mr W, gave evidence to the tribunal on internet usage and said staff were permitted to use the internet on their breaks or when the store was quiet and there was nothing to do in terms of stock duties.

Ms Jones said the first written warning and the dismissal for alleged performance issues was influenced by the pregnancy, and said compensation of €19,500 was “just and equitable”.