P worked as a buyer in a major supermarket’s online business. A restructure took place during her maternity leave and, although P was contracted to work part-time, this restructure resulted in P being redeployed to a role the duties of which were full-time. P alleged that she had initially been offered a new part-time role in the business, but when she told her managers she was pregnant the job ‘disappeared’. This meant that, upon return from maternity leave, P was instead redeployed to a role which required full-time duties (with no reduction in duties to reflect her part-time status) and was told she could do the new role in her part-time hours if she prioritised things a bit better and had the right mindset. This resulted in her being questioned when her work was not finished on time and P unsuccessfully raised an internal grievance. P resigned in response and successfully claimed constructive unfair dismissal, sex and maternity discrimination.

The employment tribunal upheld P’s claims and awarded her over £60,000 in compensation, including £10,000 for injury to feelings. The tribunal held that the employer had: (a) unfavourably treated P during her maternity leave in the manner it had consulted her about a restructure which affected her job; (b) subjected P to a detriment of indirect sex discrimination after her maternity leave by applying a provision, criterion or practice in relation to the post to which she was redeployed, which placed women at a particular disadvantage compared with men, placed P at a particular disadvantage and was not objectively justified; and (c) constructively dismissed P by breaching the implied term of trust and confidence, with that dismissal being held to be both unfair and discriminatory.

(Patterson -v- Wm Morrison Supermarkets Limited [2022] Leeds ET 1800249/2022)

Important note: ET level decisions are merely of persuasive value, and are not binding upon future ETs, but can provide a useful indicator of how certain issues are currently being deal within the ET.