Claimant v Kidzrus Nursery Limited

The tribunal found serious flaws in the consultation process. The claimant should have been consulted before the final decision on selection criteria and her selection was made, but was only invited to consultation after the decision was already taken. The promised second consultation meeting was never rearranged. Additionally, the selection criteria were not applied consistently or reasonably, as demonstrated by an unqualified employee with less service being retained while the claimant with more service was dismissed, with no evidence-based explanation for this anomaly.

While there were factors suggesting possible pregnancy-related selection (the claimant's GP advised against work attendance due to pregnancy and other vulnerabilities, and the respondent's evidence was inconsistent), the tribunal found that other pregnant workers were not selected for redundancy, the respondent had a good record of maternity returners, and the low attendance meant the claimant's unavailability was not a compelling issue. Weighing all factors, the tribunal concluded the reason or principal reason for selection was not pregnancy-related.

The tribunal found that the claimant did protected acts by raising a grievance alleging pregnancy discrimination and presenting a tribunal claim alleging race discrimination. The allegations were made genuinely, not in bad faith. The respondent refused to provide references to Supply Desk because the claimant had made allegations of race discrimination, and threatened civil action for the same reason. Both actions subjected the claimant to detriment because of the protected acts.

Withdrawn by claimant at preliminary hearing on 30 November 2021, along with other monetary claims.