Equality, diversity and human rights >
Pregnancy and maternity discrimination
In Stevenson v JM Skinner & Co EAT/0584/07, the EAT held that an employer complied with its statutory duty to carry out a risk assessment in relation to a pregnant employee when it addressed her concerns at meetings with her and, taking account of all the circumstances, evaluated and agreed the relevant risks.
In Mayr v Bäckerei und Konditorei Gerhard Flockner OHG [2008] IRLR 387, the ECJ held that the protection afforded by the Pregnant Workers Directive against dismissal on grounds of pregnancy does not extend to a woman undergoing IVF treatment who was dismissed when in-vitro-fertilised ova existed but had not yet been transferred to her uterus. However, if she was dismissed essentially because she had undergone this advanced stage of IVF treatment, her dismissal would amount to direct sex discrimination contrary to the Equal Treatment Directive.
In Blundell v The Governing Body of St Andrew's Catholic Primary School and another EAT/0329/06 the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that a teacher returning to work following maternity leave was not entitled to return to the same class that she had been teaching when her maternity leave began.
The High Court has found that the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, as amended, does not give full effect to the revised EC Equal Treatment Directive, in Equal Opportunities Commission v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (12 March 2007).
In New Southern Railway Ltd v Quinn [2006] IRLR 606 EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal holds that an employer's duty to take steps to "avoid" risk to a pregnant woman means that the risk should be reduced to its lowest acceptable level - not that it must be removed completely.
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: constructive dismissal compensation; and injury to feelings awards.
In North Western Health Board v McKenna, the ECJ holds that a sick leave scheme that treats female workers who suffer from a pregnancy-related illness in the same way as workers suffering from other types of illness falls within the scope of the Equal Pay Directive 75/117/EC rather than the Equal Treatment Directive 76/207/EC.
In British Airways plc v Starmer, the EAT holds that the tribunal was entitled to find that a decision by the employer not to allow the employee to work part-time at 50% of her full-time hours, but only at 75%, was a "provision, criterion or practice" for the purposes of s.1(2)(b) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
In Merino Gomez v Continental Industrias del Caucho SA, the European Court of Justice holds that pregnant workers have a dual entitlement to annual leave and maternity leave: pregnant workers must be able to take their annual leave during a period other than their period of maternity leave.
In Visa International Service Association v Paul the EAT holds that an employment tribunal was correct to find that an employee was constructively dismissed when her employer failed to notify her, while she was on maternity leave, of a newly created post arising out of a reorganisation in her department in which the employee was interested, and considered herself well qualified for.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to pregnancy and maternity discrimination.