In the case of Miss P D v Kelly Traffic Management Ltd a mother of three, PD, has been awarded £16,000 by an employment tribunal after being told to “get a television for her bedroom” to “have less sex and be less likely to be pregnant.”
PD took her employer, Kelly Traffic Management, to the tribunal, alleging she faced unfavourable treatment due to her pregnancy with her third child. The tribunal heard she was subjected to a “campaign of discriminatory conduct,” including “foul and abusive language” from her managers, a married couple.
When PD informed her managers that she intended to return to work after giving birth, one manager responded, “What with three kids, how is that going to work?” After taking two days off following a panic attack, PD was berated for work errors, with one manager screaming at her.
The tribunal ruled in favour of PD, noting that pregnancy discrimination can “attract higher rewards” as it is supposed to be a “period of joy.” While her claims of pregnancy and maternity discrimination were upheld, her claim of constructive unfair dismissal was not.
PD rejoined the company in January 2019 after previously working there from August 2016 to August 2018. She was promoted to team leader, responsible for notices and approvals. Shortly after returning, PD informed her managers, Mr and Mrs A, that she was pregnant. Mr. A made the television comment, which he later denied.
Following the panic attack, PD was verbally attacked by Mr. A during a meeting. She claimed to have been “deskilled” over the next few months, with aspects of her role reassigned to others. PD raised a complaint about the treatment, stating her stress should be minimized due to her pregnancy.
An investigation led to Mr. A receiving a six-month verbal warning for harassment. PD resigned on the day her maternity leave ended in April 2023.
Employment Judge Jonathan Gidney concluded PD had faced a “campaign of discrimination” by her managers. She was awarded £16,200 for injury to feelings.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
