Dismissed after maternity leave: fixed-term contract manager wins automatic unfair dismissal claim
A contract manager who was dismissed after returning from maternity leave has been awarded £39,538 after a tribunal found her dismissal was automatically unfair because it was connected to her maternity leave.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Contract Manager on a fixed-term contract from 1 April 2019.
- She took ordinary maternity leave from 5 October 2020 to 31 March 2021.
- During her maternity leave, her duties were redistributed to other staff members.
- On her return, she was told her role no longer existed and was offered a different role which she refused.
- She was dismissed on 17 May 2021 for refusing to accept the new role.
- The tribunal found her dismissal was automatically unfair because it was connected to her maternity leave.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as Contract Manager on a fixed-term contract.
-
New role discussed
Discussions about claimant taking a combined Contract Manager & Supplier Relationship Manager role.
-
Maternity leave notification
Claimant notified HR of intention to start maternity leave on 5 October 2020.
-
Maternity leave started
Claimant commenced ordinary maternity leave.
-
Decision to reallocate duties
Internal decision that claimant's duties would be retained by other staff.
-
Fixed-term contract expiry
Claimant's fixed-term contract expired; she was informed her role would change.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned from maternity leave and was offered the SC&SRM role.
-
Meeting confirming role change
Claimant was told her old role no longer existed and she must accept the new role.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed for refusing to accept the new role.
-
Remedy hearing
Tribunal awarded £39,538.58 in damages.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal was automatically unfair because it was connected to her taking ordinary maternity leave, and whether she suffered discrimination and detriments related to her maternity leave.
The outcome
The tribunal declared that the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed because her dismissal was connected to her taking ordinary maternity leave. The claim of breach of regulation 18 of the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations succeeded, and the claims of maternity-related discrimination and unlawful detriments succeeded in part. The claims of victimisation, less favourable treatment under the Fixed-Term Employees Regulations, and failure to provide written reasons for dismissal were dismissed.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £1,088.00
- Compensatory award: £9,461.04
- Total: £39,538.58
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees on maternity leave have the right to return to the same job or a suitable alternative role; failing to offer this can lead to automatic unfair dismissal.
- Fixed-term contracts do not reduce an employer's duty to offer suitable alternative employment when a role changes during maternity leave.
- Employers should consult with employees on maternity leave about any changes to their role and ensure the process is fair and transparent.
- Dismissing an employee for refusing a role that is not a suitable alternative can be automatically unfair if connected to maternity leave.
This case shows the risks employers face when restructuring roles while an employee is on maternity leave. The claimant, a contract manager on a fixed-term contract, went on ordinary maternity leave in October 2020. During her absence, her duties were redistributed, and on her return she was told her role no longer existed. She was offered a different role, which she refused, and was subsequently dismissed.
What the tribunal found
The tribunal concluded that the dismissal was automatically unfair because it was connected to her taking maternity leave. The respondent had failed to offer her a suitable alternative role, as required by the Maternity and Parental Leave Regulations. The tribunal also found that the claimant had suffered unfavourable treatment because of her maternity leave, including the failure to consult her about the changes.
What could have been done differently
If the respondent had properly consulted the claimant during her maternity leave and offered her a genuinely suitable alternative role, the outcome might have been different. Employers should ensure that any redundancy process affecting employees on maternity leave is handled with particular care, including offering suitable alternative employment where possible.
Why this matters
This case highlights that fixed-term contract employees have the same rights to return from maternity leave as permanent staff. Employers cannot use the expiry of a fixed-term contract as a reason to avoid their obligations. The award of over £39,000 reflects the seriousness of the breach and serves as a reminder of the protections available to new mothers.
Similar cases
Fleet sales assistant dismissed during redundancy after maternity leave: tribunal upholds decision
A fleet sales assistant who was made redundant after returning from maternity leave has lost her claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination. The tribunal found the redundancy was genuine and her discrimination claims were out of time.
Dismissed while on sick leave: fixed-term contract not renewed without consultation
A mental health practitioner with 15 years' experience was unfairly dismissed when her fixed-term contract was not renewed while she was on long-term sick leave. The tribunal awarded £33,443.28.
University academic unfairly dismissed after flawed redundancy consultation over retained post
A University of Leicester academic was unfairly dismissed when the university failed to properly consult on redundancy selection after changing its proposal to retain a permanent post. The tribunal awarded £72,487.50 in compensation.
Redundancy without consultation: protective award of 90 days' pay
A former employee won a protective award of 90 days' pay after his employer made him redundant without any consultation. The company was in administration and did not attend the hearing.