Tribunal Steps In As Pregnant Woman Reports Boss For Firing Her After Returning From Maternity Leave
Imagine an employee returning from maternity leave pregnant with a second child. This is the theme surrounding the story you're about to read.
Nikita Twitchen is the employee who lost her job as she was getting ready to resume her work as an office administration assistant at First Grade Projects. Shortly after beginning work at the Pontypridd-based company in October 2021, the woman got pregnant and left for maternity leave in June 2022.
She told an employment tribunal that she and managing director Jeremy Morgan had a "very good" working relationship and that he had been "very responsive" when she wanted to talk to him. On February 17, 2023, Twitchen went to a return-to-work meeting with her supervisor after welcoming her kid and getting ready to resume her job.
This "started positively," according to Morgan, who also stated that he was anticipating the mother's return to work and that he and she had agreed on her hours. However, Twitchen's announcement that she was pregnant once more at eight weeks "came as a shock."
She disputed her employer's assertion that he congratulated her. As a result, even though she had anticipated returning to work on April 3, no one from First Grade got in touch with her when her maternity leave ended on March 26.
A woman returns to work from maternity leave pregnant again
Getty ImagesHe waited for Morgan to answer, then finally said, "It's best to leave it until you have your routine in place." He surprisingly "failed to respond substantively" when Twitchen questioned him on April 4th regarding her eligibility for holidays later in the year.
After following up, Morgan called the mother on April 18 to inform her that she was being let go due to financial issues and late payments to the company. Twitchen was unaware that a workshop manager had also been laid off earlier that year, according to the employer, who also said that new software meant her position "would no longer exist."
It's said that Morgan and the company had to pay up
The judge ruled she should be "commended" for working "in very hot condition" until 39 weeks while working at a launderette and a caravan park from June to October 2023. The judge also mentioned how Twitchen's family's financial security depended on her having a job.
Media WalesAdditionally, he pointed out that Morgan had stated the company was doing well during the February meeting and had made no reference to financial issues or layoffs. Twitchen never received a written statement outlining the reasons for her termination, and First Grade was criticized for failing to provide proof of any of these allegations throughout the court case.
In addition, the business had invested in cars, hired staff, and changed its name since she was fired. These disclosures, according to the judge, "cast doubt" on Morgan's assertion that the business was having financial difficulties.
It was discovered that Twitchen's pregnancy was the reason she was fired
They considered Morgan's "change of attitude" after finding out about the pregnancy, his "speed of response" to messages, and his "complete lack of any coherent evidence-based alternative explanation," even though he had plenty of chances to offer one.
LincsLawIn addition to being discriminatory and unfair, the judge decided that Ms. Twitchen's termination must have caused her "real anxiety and distress over a period of time, having been dismissed when pregnant and losing her sense of financial security with all the family responsibilities that she had." Morgan and FirstGrade were sentenced to pay £28,706 in compensation.
In a statement, First Grade Projects told WalesOnline saying:
"We are extremely disappointed with the outcome of the tribunal. We are actively reviewing all relevant information and considering all available options. At this point in time we are unable to provide any further comment."And this is where we wrap things up!
