Redundancy after maternity leave: indirect sex discrimination over flexibility requirement
A sales advisor with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed and indirectly discriminated against after New Look required flexibility during redundancy. She was awarded £8,672.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Sales Advisor from 3 June 2000 to 21 May 2021.
- She was dismissed by reason of redundancy following her return from maternity leave on 17 May 2021.
- The tribunal found indirect sex discrimination due to a practice requiring flexibility during redundancy.
- The dismissal was procedurally unfair because the respondent failed to check with stores about accommodating her availability.
- Compensation was reduced by 70% for the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
- A 20% uplift was applied for failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice.
Timeline
-
Maternity leave commenced
The claimant started her fourth period of maternity leave.
-
At risk of redundancy notified
The claimant was notified that she was at risk of redundancy due to the closure of the Tottenham Court Road store.
-
First consultation meeting
The claimant met with Lily Vashnevsky to discuss her availability and potential vacancies.
-
Second consultation meeting
The claimant met with Hema Ladwa; she expressed interest in roles at Colliers Wood, White City, and Wood Green.
-
Third consultation meeting
The meeting was brief; the claimant's redundancy decision was deferred until her return from maternity leave.
-
White City contract sent
The claimant received a contract assigning her to White City, which she believed was a substantive role.
-
Fourth consultation meeting
The claimant stated her availability as Thursday and Friday 7am-6pm; Ms Vashnevsky checked stores but found no suitable roles.
-
Grievance email sent
The claimant complained about the redundancy process; the respondent did not treat it as a formal grievance.
-
Dismissed by reason of redundancy
The claimant was made redundant after no suitable alternative employment was found.
-
Appeal hearing
The claimant attended an appeal hearing with Rebecca Skinner; the appeal was partially upheld but dismissal confirmed.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the redundancy dismissal was unfair and whether the requirement for flexibility during the process indirectly discriminated against women, given that women are more likely to have childcare responsibilities.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claims of unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination, but dismissed claims of direct sex and maternity discrimination.
Key reasons:
- The flexibility requirement placed women at a particular disadvantage, and New Look failed to justify it as proportionate.
- The dismissal was procedurally unfair because the respondent did not check stores for roles accommodating the claimant's availability.
- Compensation was reduced by 70% (Polkey deduction) for the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
Compensation breakdown:
- Compensatory award for unfair dismissal: £2,998.30 (including £2,548.30 loss of earnings and £450 loss of statutory rights)
- Compensation for discrimination: £5,673.83 (including £5,000 injury to feelings, £536.99 interest, and £136.84 interest on loss of earnings)
- Total: £8,672.13
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should check all available vacancies when an employee on maternity leave is at risk of redundancy, including stores that may accommodate limited availability.
- A requirement for full flexibility during redundancy may indirectly discriminate against women if it disproportionately affects those with childcare responsibilities.
- Failing to treat a complaint as a formal grievance can lead to an ACAS Code uplift of up to 25% on compensation.
- Representing yourself at tribunal is possible, but having legal advice can help navigate complex discrimination and procedural issues.
A long-serving employee made redundant after maternity leave
The claimant had worked for New Look for 20 years when her store closed during her fourth maternity leave. Despite expressing interest in roles at other stores, she was dismissed after returning to work, because she could only work Thursday and Friday 7am-6pm. The tribunal found that New Look's requirement for flexibility during the redundancy process indirectly discriminated against her as a woman, since women are more likely to have childcare responsibilities.
What New Look could have done differently
The tribunal noted that the respondent did not check with stores to see if they could accommodate the claimant's availability. A simple phone call might have found a suitable role. Additionally, the claimant had been sent a contract for a role at White City, which was later withdrawn without explanation. Treating her complaint as a formal grievance could have avoided the 20% ACAS uplift.
Why this case matters
This case highlights that redundancy selection criteria must not indirectly discriminate, especially against women returning from maternity leave. Employers must consider flexible working requests and explore all options before dismissing. The 70% Polkey deduction shows that even when a dismissal is unfair, compensation may be reduced if the employee would likely have been dismissed anyway. For employees, it underscores the importance of documenting availability and challenging unreasonable flexibility requirements.
Similar cases
Dismissed without a disciplinary hearing: procedural unfairness costs employer £9,500
A former employee with two years' service was unfairly dismissed after being suspended and then sacked without any disciplinary hearing. The Cambridge tribunal awarded £9,546.81 in compensation.
PCV driver dismissed after failing breath tests: flawed appeal but dismissal largely upheld
A PCV driver who failed three breath alcohol tests was unfairly dismissed due to a flawed appeal, but the tribunal found she would have been dismissed anyway and reduced compensation by 75% for contributory conduct.
Finance Manager loses redundancy and discrimination claims after returning from maternity leave
An Employment Tribunal has dismissed all claims of maternity discrimination, harassment, victimisation and unfair dismissal brought by a Finance Manager who was made redundant shortly after returning from maternity leave.
18-year finance officer wins constructive dismissal after unfair re-grading and ignored grievance
A finance and commissioning officer with 18 years' service was constructively dismissed after Hertfordshire County Council unfairly re-graded her role and failed to properly consider her grievance. The tribunal awarded £66,476.86.