Nursery worker wins £40,000 after getting ‘fired for being pregnant’

A pregnant nursery worker has won £40,000 after her employer barred her from going to hospital then fired her.

Simone Cousins, 29, who was left stressed due to the ordeal, has successfully sued on claims on pregnancy discrimination and harassment and unfair dismissal.

She was accused of falsifying wages by boss Maria Noble. But there was never any evidence for this, and a judge has ruled Cousins was the victim of an “oppressive and high-handed’ campaign.

When nursery manager Cousins announced fell pregnant, managing director Noble ‘unreasonably’ denied her requests for hospital appointments and made her change them to suit her schedule.

Now Cousins, who worked at the Dovecote Nursery, Northampton, has won £39,535 at an employment tribunal after a judge ruled she was sacked because she was pregnant.

The employment tribunal, held virtually in Norwich, Norfolk, heard Cousins had a good relationship with Noble before she was pregnant. They had worked together for two years.

Cousins felt pressured to work her normal hours despite being tired and feeling sick.

When pregnant, Cousins requested time off for five appointments. One was granted, but others were refused, while Noble forced her employee to reschedule some up to three times.

No attempt was made by Noble to arrange cover for Cousins, the tribunal found.

Then without warning she was called to a formal meeting where she was accused of claiming wages she did not earn – but no evidence was presented.

Have you been harassed or fired at work for being pregnant? You can tell your story to sam.barker@reachplc.com

She later received a letter referring to “large discrepancies”, which claimed there was a difference of 58.5 hours.

Weeks later she was summoned to another meeting in which she was told she could be sacked for gross misconduct – this time the letter alleged there were 95 hours she did not work.

The 95 hours were deducted from her pay. Noble emailed Cousins 90 questions at 5pm and demanded written explanations for them by 10am the next day.

Cousins answered the questions, despite struggling to sit at a computer for a prolonged time.

The 95 hours were repaid, but Cousins was then sacked for gross misconduct on grounds that she falsified 95 hours and failed to use the company’s sign-in book.

The tribunal ruled that Noble failed to listen to Cousins’ answers and could have discovered that she wasn’t lying about hours worked if she had bothered to check the work log.

Her allegations were “totally illogical”, the tribunal said.

At the tribunal, employment Judge Robin Postle said: “It is clear that the allegations levied against Ms Cousins were patently untrue and Ms Cousins was able to respond in some detail to each and every allegation.”

He added: “The tribunal is left with the inevitable conclusion that the reason for the Ms Cousins’ dismissal was her pregnancy.”

The judge also said the nursery of 60 staff could have accommodated Cousins’ appointment requests and had “clear legal obligations” to do so.

The law says that employees are entitled to reasonable paid time off for their pregnancy responsibilities, according to charity Maternity Action.

After the ruling, Cousins said: “The treatment I experienced was appalling, especially when you consider this was in the childcare industry and she [Mrs Noble] is a mother herself – she didn’t understand why I needed the appointments.”

Cousins’ daughter, Sophie, now three, was born with a rare congenital condition called Apert Syndrome, which affects how the skull, face, hands and feet develop in one in 100,000 babies.

Sophie needed open heart surgery as a newborn and a stay at Great Ormond Street Hospital, and since has been in and out of hospital for operations. Cousins now cares for her and has not gone back to work.

Last month Labour said it would make it illegal to make women redundant during pregnancy, and for six months after they restart work.

The party also wants the Conservative government to overhaul the current shared parental leave policy, which many fathers cannot claim.

The current system excludes agency workers, those with zero-hours contracts and the self-employed.