Head of E-Commerce loses pregnancy discrimination claim but wins holiday pay

A redundancy that stood up to scrutiny

This case shows how a genuine redundancy situation can protect an employer even when the employee is pregnant. The Head of E-Commerce had only been in post for 8 months when she was made redundant. She believed the redundancy was a sham, designed to get rid of her because she was pregnant. But the tribunal found that the decision to make her role redundant was made before the key decision-makers knew about her pregnancy.

The tribunal heard evidence that the company was restructuring and that seven roles were identified for redundancy. The claimant's role was included because her responsibilities had been reduced after the company hired an Account Manager for Pureplay. The tribunal accepted that this was a genuine business decision, not a pretext.

What the employer did right

The employer could show that the redundancy decision was made on 22 April 2022, before the decision-makers learned of the pregnancy on 27 April. This timing was critical. The tribunal also noted that the claimant was placed at risk of redundancy and given a consultation meeting, albeit a brief one. While the process was not perfect, the tribunal found that the redundancy was genuine and the dismissal was fair.

The holiday pay claim succeeded

The only claim that succeeded was for unpaid holiday pay. The claimant had 10 days of holiday carried over from 2021 that she had not taken. Under the Working Time Regulations, she was entitled to be paid for this accrued holiday on termination. This is a reminder that holiday pay claims are often straightforward and can succeed even when other claims fail.

Why this matters

This case is a cautionary tale for employees who suspect discrimination in a redundancy situation. To win, you need evidence that the decision-maker knew about your protected characteristic and that it influenced the decision. Here, the timing worked against the claimant. For employers, the case shows the importance of documenting the business rationale for redundancy and ensuring that decision-makers are not aware of protected characteristics when making selections.