SheThe boss terminated one of his employees because she returned from maternity leave pregnant again.
Nikita Twitchen, an employee of First Grade Projects, faced dismissal after returning from maternity leave while pregnant. The tribunal found her dismissal was discriminatory, highlighting issues with her employer’s conduct.
Nikita Twitchen worked as an office administration assistant.
She joined First Grade Projects, a business in Pontypridd, in October 2021.
She began her role as an office administration assistant. After becoming pregnant, she went on maternity leave in June 2022.
Twitchen described her relationship with the managing director, Jeremy Morgan, as “very good.” She noted that he was “very responsive” when she needed assistance.
Twitchen planned to return to work after her maternity leave and attended a return-to-work meeting on February 17, 2023. She said the meeting began on a positive note.
Morgan expressed that he was looking forward to her return. They agreed on her work hours, and everything seemed settled.
However, the situation changed when Twitchen informed Morgan that she was eight weeks pregnant. Although Morgan claimed he congratulated her, Twitchen disagreed.
The atmosphere shifted, leading to significant complications upon her return.
Nikita Twitchen fired by her boss after her pregnancy journey
Twitchen’s maternity leave officially ended on March 26, 2023, and she expected to return to work on April 3.
Despite this, no one from First Grade contacted her to confirm her return date. She reached out to Morgan, who advised her to “wait until you have your routine in place.”
On April 4, Twitchen inquired about her holiday entitlement for the year. However, Morgan did not provide a clear response.
Eventually, he called her on April 18, informing her that she was being made redundant. He cited financial difficulties and delayed payments to the business as reasons for the decision.
Morgan further explained that new software had made her role obsolete.
He also claimed that a workshop manager had been made redundant earlier in the year, though Twitchen was unaware of this. Despite these explanations, she felt that something was amiss.
The tribunal findings about the incident
The employment tribunal thoroughly reviewed the case, and the evidence painted a different picture. During the proceedings, several inconsistencies came to light:
-No Mention of Financial Issues: At the February meeting, Morgan did not indicate any financial problems. He had stated that the business was doing well.
– Failure to Provide Evidence: First Grade Projects failed to produce evidence of the financial difficulties or redundancies that Morgan claimed during the tribunal.
– Rebranding and Expansion:Since Twitchen’s dismissal, the company had rebranded, hired new employees, and invested in new vehicles. These actions contradicted Morgan’s claims of financial strain.
The tribunal found that Morgan’s change in attitude after learning of Twitchen’s pregnancy was clear.
His delayed responses to her messages and the absence of a written explanation for her redundancy raised doubts.
The judge concluded that Twitchen was dismissed because she was pregnant, and her firing was discriminatory.
Twitchen’s resilience after dismissal
After losing her job, Twitchen worked at a launderette and a caravan park from June to October 2023.
She worked until she was 39 weeks pregnant. The judge commended her for continuing to work in “very hot conditions,” highlighting her determination to provide financial stability for her family.
The tribunal ruled that Twitchen’s dismissal was unfair and discriminatory.
The judge acknowledged the distress caused by losing her job while pregnant, noting that it affected her sense of financial security. First Grade Projects and Jeremy Morgan were ordered to pay Twitchen £28,706 in compensation.
Following the ruling, First Grade Projects issued a statement to WalesOnline. “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.”