An employment tribunal has awarded a former recruiter compensation of PS25,000 after she returned to a vacant office following maternity leave.
Anna Munkevics was a trainee consultant for Echo Personnel, Hereford. She began her maternity leave in May 2022.
A male colleague offered her a permanent position as a recruitment consultant with a salary of PS25,000 per year while she was pregnant. The tribunal found that the work of his colleague was “same or broadly similar”.
Munkevics verbally agreed with her manager to return to her former role for four hours per day on two days of the week before returning to full-time work after a few weeks. This agreement was not documented in writing.
She arranged for childcare up until July 2023 when, according to her, full-time nursery care will be available and she plans to return full time to recruitment.
Jennie Alexander, the director of finance, informed her just three weeks prior to her return that the “agreement she had with her manager” was no longer possible. She would have to start working full-time from the beginning.
Munkevics filed a complaint, claiming that she was “misled” by two directors regarding her return terms and would not be able to arrange childcare at short notice for full-time employment. She resigned two weeks later, with a one-month notice.
She did not receive a response to her complaint, but a director acknowledged her resignation and offered a reference for her if needed.
The tribunal heard that she returned to her office in May 2023 to complete her notice period, but found it “vacated and abandoned”.
She contacted the Greggs branch next door. The staff there informed her that an removal van recently visited and took everything.
Munkevics said that there was no communication regarding the closure of the office, and she “took that as a sign”, that she would not be expected to return to work for her notice period. However, she expected to still receive payment.
The company stated that a mobile recruitment van was available to work from, but the other offices were miles away. Munkevics was not informed about the van.
The Tribunal upheld‘s claims of equal pay and breach of contract, and automatically unfair dismissal for reasons related to pregnancy, and awarded her PS25.109.92 as compensation for loss in earnings and injury of feelings.
Jonathan Gidney, a judge in the employment court, said that Mrs Alexander’s behavior was “calculated or likely to destroy trust or seriously damage confidence.” It was not a reasonable or proper reason, as Mrs Alexander did not try to explore the request and discuss it with the claimant.
“We find that it is difficult to understand why Mrs Alexander didn’t write to the applicant… to explain that the Hereford branch had been permanently shut down and…that the claimant would have to work out of the mobile recruiting vehicle until a new branch was found. This failure has not been explained.”
Subscribe to our weekly HR news and guidance
Every Wednesday, receive the Personnel Today Direct newsletter.
Personnel Today offers employee relations opportunities
Browse Employee Relations Jobs
