Pregnant stable-hand was unfairly dismissed by Shropshire riding school
A stable-hand who was sacked two weeks after informing her boss she was pregnant was wrongfully dismissed, an employment judge has ruled.
Alison Parsons, 27, had worked at the Oswestry Equestrian Centre in Selattyn since February 2016.
Despite not having set hours, she regularly worked around 16 hours a week.
An employment tribunal in Telford in January heard how she told the centre’s joint owner, Richard Connell, that she was pregnant, but wanted to work as long as possible.
However two weeks later he told her she was no longer needed as there was not enough work for her.
In a report to the hearing published this week, employment judge Christopher Gaskell found that the claimant was wrongfully dismissed in breach of her contract.
The unanimous judgement at the tribunal was that respondent, Mr Connell, discriminated against the claimant because of her pregnancy.
Miss Parsons told the tribunal that she and three other stable-hands worked out their own rotas to ensure there was always plenty of cover, and they were paid according to the hours worked each week.
In January, 2017, she found she was pregnant, and told the centre’s joint owner Mr Connell and with the baby due in September, but she wanted to continue working.
In response to the claim of unfair dismissal, Mr Connell insisted that Miss Parsons had resigned from her employment rather than having been dismissed.
However his partner, Maria Castillo gave evidence that the claimant’s employment had not been terminated either by dismissal or resignation, and that indeed her employment was continuing.
Mr Connell then stated the same, but the judge found that the witness statement from him served on the claimant differed in content to that provided at the tribunal.
In the earlier version, signed and dated by Mr Connell on 29 October, he stated that in a conversation with the claimant in February 2017 she had told him that she wished to cease working for the respondent straight away.
However, in the later version, signed and dated by Mr Connell on 12 December, he stated that she had simply told him that she couldn’t work during the week commencing 13 February, but that her employment had continued thereafter.
Neither Mr Connell nor Mrs Castillo could explain the discrepancy.
A further hearing will be held to finalise the financial settlement.
