Dismissed for a cigarette break while pregnant: a taxi operator's unfair dismissal win
A telephone operator who was dismissed for taking a cigarette break 12 minutes into her shift, while other employees who did the same were not disciplined, has won her claim for automatic unfair dismissal related to pregnancy. The tribunal awarded her £17,003.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant worked as a telephone operator for a taxi firm and was dismissed after taking a cigarette break 12 minutes into her shift on 18 August 2021.
- Other employees who took similar cigarette breaks were not disciplined.
- The claimant had informed the respondent she was pregnant and that her sickness was pregnancy-related.
- The respondent failed to investigate the claimant's comparison with other employees and ignored her pregnancy discrimination complaint.
- The respondent made a comment to the claimant's mother implying the claimant could work if she could shop, and later said the claimant could return after 12 months once she had 'learned her lesson'.
Timeline
-
WhatsApp message about cigarette breaks
Director Mr Murphy sent a WhatsApp message stating that putting phones on hold during cigarette breaks would be gross misconduct, but the practice of taking breaks continued with knowledge of management.
-
First cigarette break observed
Claimant took a cigarette break at 20:23, observed by director's son-in-law. Claimant says phones were not on hold.
-
Second cigarette break and pregnancy sickness
Claimant took a cigarette break 12 minutes into her shift at 18:12, stating she needed fresh air due to pregnancy sickness.
-
Invitation to disciplinary hearing
Claimant received an email from Keith Murphy detailing allegations relating to cigarette breaks on 16 and 18 August. Claimant had previously raised pregnancy discrimination.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Claimant attended and raised that she was being treated differently due to pregnancy, naming three other employees who took similar breaks. Respondent did not investigate.
-
Dismissal letter
Claimant received a letter dismissing her for leaving her post on 18 August. No mention of the 16 August allegation or the comparison points raised.
-
Harassment comment
At a meeting with claimant's mother, respondent said claimant could return after 12 months once she had 'learned her lesson', referencing maternity leave.
-
Appeal dismissed
Respondent sent a letter stating 'The decision to dismiss you stands' without addressing any grounds of appeal.
-
Start of loss period
Claimant's maternity pay ended; she began to suffer loss of earnings.
-
New employment found
Claimant found alternative employment working 12-hour shifts, 5 days a week, mitigating her loss.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed for a reason related to pregnancy under section 99 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and whether two comments made by the respondent constituted harassment related to pregnancy under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010.
The outcome
The tribunal found in favour of the claimant on all claims.
- The dismissal was automatically unfair because it was related to pregnancy. The respondent failed to investigate the claimant's comparison with other employees who took similar cigarette breaks without discipline, and ignored her pregnancy discrimination complaint.
- Two comments made by the respondent – one implying the claimant could work if she could shop, and another saying she could return after 12 months once she had 'learned her lesson' – were found to be harassment related to pregnancy.
- The respondent also failed to provide a written statement of employment particulars.
Compensation:
- Injury to feelings: £12,000
- Interest on injury to feelings: £1,433.35
- Loss of earnings (compensatory award): £2,890
- Failure to provide written particulars: £680
- Total: £17,003.35
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are disciplined or dismissed for conduct that other employees routinely get away with, and you have a protected characteristic like pregnancy, the difference in treatment may be evidence of discrimination.
- Employers should investigate any comparison evidence raised by an employee before making a dismissal decision, especially when the employee has raised a discrimination complaint.
- Comments that belittle or stereotype pregnant employees – such as suggesting they could work if they can shop – can amount to harassment and lead to separate compensation for injury to feelings.
- Failing to provide a written statement of employment particulars can result in an additional award of up to four weeks' pay.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights how a seemingly minor workplace incident – a cigarette break – can become the focus of a pregnancy discrimination claim when the employer's response is inconsistent and dismissive of the employee's protected status.
The claimant, a telephone operator for a taxi firm, was dismissed after taking a cigarette break 12 minutes into her shift. She had informed her employer she was pregnant and that her sickness was pregnancy-related. Crucially, other employees who took similar cigarette breaks were not disciplined. When she raised this comparison at her disciplinary hearing, the respondent did not investigate it. The tribunal found that the real reason for dismissal was related to her pregnancy, making it automatically unfair.
What the losing side could have done differently
The respondent made several critical errors. First, they failed to investigate the claimant's comparison with other employees. Second, they ignored her pregnancy discrimination complaint. Third, they made inappropriate comments – including telling her mother that she could return after 12 months once she had 'learned her lesson' – which the tribunal found to be harassment. A fair process would have involved considering the claimant's explanation, investigating the comparator evidence, and recognising that pregnancy-related sickness does not justify different treatment without a clear, non-discriminatory reason.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces that pregnancy-related dismissals are automatically unfair, regardless of the employer's stated reason. It also shows that comments made during the dismissal process can lead to separate harassment claims with awards for injury to feelings. For employees, the key takeaway is to raise any comparison with non-pregnant colleagues and to document any comments that suggest bias. For employers, the message is clear: inconsistent discipline and dismissive attitudes towards pregnancy-related issues will not withstand scrutiny.
Similar cases
Dismissed after requesting maternity leave: pregnancy discrimination and automatic unfair dismissal
An administrator/receptionist was awarded £15,436.66 after being dismissed days after requesting maternity leave, with the tribunal finding pregnancy discrimination and automatic unfair dismissal.
Pregnant cleaner dismissed without risk assessment: £9,000 award
A cleaner was dismissed while pregnant, without a maternity risk assessment. The tribunal awarded £9,107.40, including £7,500 for injury to feelings.
Dismissed while pregnant: automatic unfair dismissal and ACAS uplift
A makeup specialist was automatically unfairly dismissed because of her pregnancy. The tribunal awarded over £40,000 including an ACAS code uplift and injury to feelings.
Pregnant employee dismissed: automatic unfair dismissal after employer failed to respond
A former employee was awarded over £18,500 after being automatically unfairly dismissed due to pregnancy. The employer did not defend the claim, leading to a default judgment.