Cork cook was dismissed from work for being sick 'up to 20 times a day' while pregnant

The co-owner of Easy Meals Ltd in Millstreet, Samantha Cleary, told the cook she was “pregnant and not disabled” and expected her to continue to do her work as normal

Stacey Barrett was admitted to hospital with severe nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. Severe complications can arise from this, including extreme dehydration, dizziness and more. File picture: Pexels

A line cook, suffering from severe nausea and vomiting during pregnancy and who was allegedly told by her female boss that she was “pregnant and not disabled” has been awarded €16,000 compensation for her discriminatory summary dismissal while pregnant.

This follows Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) adjudicator, Lefre de Burgh, ordering Millstreet-based fast food outlet operator, Easy Meals Ltd, to pay Stacey Barrett €16,000 for the discriminatory summary dismissal on gender grounds.

Ms de Burgh has ordered the firm to pay an additional €500 to Ms Barrett for a separate workplace breach.

Ms Barrett started working at the Millstreet fast food outlet on August 21, 2020, in a part-time capacity as a line cook and she also served customers. On January 31, 2021, Ms Barrett told her employer that she was pregnant and the following day on February 1, Ms Barrett was admitted to hospital with severe nausea and vomiting during pregnancy.

Severe complications can arise from this, including extreme dehydration, dizziness and more, and Ms Barrett was suffering from all of these symptoms, sometimes vomiting in work.

Ms Barrett submitted that when she returned to work, she undertook her job as best as she could and claimed that her employer was aware of the difficulties the pregnancy was causing her.

Ms Barrett told the WRC hearing that she was "vomiting up to 20 times a day, losing weight and severely dehydrated". Ms Barrett submitted that when she endeavoured to discuss the difficulties she was having in work, she alleged that line manager and business co-owner Samantha Cleary told her she was “pregnant and not disabled” and expected her to continue to do her work as normal.

WRC findings

In her findings, Ms de Burgh found that Ms Barrett was dismissed as a direct result of pregnancy-related illness, in circumstances where her employer was on notice of her pregnancy. Ms de Burgh found that the treatment meted out to Ms Barrett was “egregious" in nature “and I note its foolishness in addition to its unlawfulness”.

Ms de Burgh further accepted Ms Barrett's uncontested evidence that she was the subject of an inappropriate comment at work by her line manager, Samantha Cleary, relating to her pregnancy.

The WRC adjudicator noted Ms Barrett’s distress both at the treatment to which she was subjected and the economic and emotional toll it took on her, and in particular, in terms of the impact of the unlawful discrimination.

Ms de Burgh noted Ms Barrett’s inability to access social welfare supports which may otherwise have been available to her. Ms de Burgh stated that in employment law, “pregnant women are a particularly protected class of person legally, in recognition of the vulnerability — including economic vulnerability — which pregnancy and its attendant circumstances can bring”.

At hearing, Ms Barrett submitted that she often vomited during her shift and alleged that if she missed time, because of her illness during her midweek shift to 9pm, she was then forced to work until 10pm, sometimes 11pm, by her employer.

Ms Barrett continued to be ill from her pregnancy and advised her employer that she would not be able to attend work. When Ms Barrett asked why she was removed from the roster on the week ending February 17, her employer allegedly told her to “just be quiet.” 

At hearing, Ms Barrett was asked if there were any efforts made to make her feel supported during the pregnancy at work, she said "No. Absolutely not". Ms Barrett alleged that Ms Cleary told her anecdotes about when she was pregnant and told her that she "worked up until the day before she gave birth" and then "put the buggy in the back of the shop when her children were small, and worked away". 

Dismissal by email

On February 18, Ms Barrett’s doctor certified her unfit for work and Ms Barrett texted her employer the following day that she would not be attending work. In response, her bosses dismissed her via an email. 

The email, dated February 19, 2021, read: "Hi Stacey, unfortunately we have to let you go. You have not been yourself the last few weeks. When you are at work it is like that you are not here. Not turning up to work on your days and letting me down and stuck for someone to cover you. I’ve got a business to look after and can’t be left stuck. After our talk nothing had changed. I’m sorry. All the best in your pregnancy, Claudio (Malizia) and Samantha (Cleary).”

A married couple, Mr Malizia and Ms Cleary are directors of Easy Meals Ltd and each has a 50% share in the firm.

In response, Ms Barrett told her former bosses: “Hi Samantha and Claudio, I think that’s really unfair. I have done my best considering how sick I have been and have a right to take sick days. I understand that it is difficult for you with a lack of staff but the responsibility to find cover does not fall on me.”

There was no appearance on behalf of the employer, Easy Meals Ltd, at hearing and Ms de Burgh said that she was satisfied that the employer was on notice of the hearing.