Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

In the case of Lewandowski v Bradford District Apprenticeship Training Academy 1801538/2016 the Employment Tribunal held that Ms Lewandowski had been discriminated against when she was dismissed by her employer because of ’emotional volatility’ (as this emotional volatility had arisen through circumstances relating to her pregnancy).

The facts in Lewandowski v Bradford District Apprenticeship Training Academy

Ms Lewandowski commenced employment with Bradford District Apprenticeship Training Academy (“BDATA”) as an Employer Engagement Officer on 22 July 2013 on a fixed-term contract running to  30 March 2015. She was promoted to the position of Apprenticeship Manager in December 2013 and her contract was extended to 31 March 2016.

BDATA is a joint venture between Bradford College and City of Bradford Metropolitan Council, with the aim of acting as a broker between employers and apprentices. The Council provided three years of funding to BDATA, which was due to end on 31 March 2016. This was an anticipated event and planning for that eventuality took place in late 2015, as it was necessary for the organisation to plan out its options to ensure that the venture continued beyond 2016. The employee of BDATA were Kate Dallas-Wood, the Chief Executive Officer (on a salary of £40,000 per annum), Ms Lewandowski (on a salary of £33,000 per annum), and Jessica Wolfenden, Marketing Executive (on a salary of £16,000 per annum).

In November 2015 Bradford College made the decision that BDATA would be ‘spun out’ of the college as a separate entity from April 2015. A board meeting took place on 12 January 2016 and at this meeting it was decided that Ms Dallas-Wood’s contract would not be renewed beyond March 2016, but that Ms Lewandowski and Ms Wolfenden would both be offered a 12-month extension to their contracts to 31 March 2017. From November 2015 to January 2016 the management accounts and financial performance of BDATA was finalized and approved. Ms Dallas-Wood subsequently informed Ms Wolfenden and Ms Lewandowski of what had been decided and that they would be offered a 12-month extension.

In late January 2016 Ms Lewandowski disclosed her pregnancy to her friends at work, friends which included Ms Wolfenden. She became keen to have her contract extension finalized and chased Ms Dallas-Wood for  a copy of the contract. She also approached Ms Dallas-Wood on 18 February 2016 to find out what was happening with her contract, and explained that she was pregnant (she said this in confidence and explained that she was telling Ms Dallas-Wood so that she would understand why she was pressing for the written extension).

On 22 February 2016 there was a further board meeting, at which the Tribunal found that Ms Dallas-Wood had disclosed Ms Lewandowski’s pregnancy to them and that it was discussed that there was a need to extract another salary because the business could not afford it.

After the board meeting on 22 February 2016 Ms Lewandowski was called to a meeting with Ms Dallas-Wood and other board members. Ms Lewandowski was told that despite her being offered a contract extension to 31 March 2017 the position had now changed and the business could not afford her salary. She was told that her contract would terminate on 31 March 2016.

Ms Lewandowski suffered a miscarriage in March 2016 and submitted a grievance in June 2016 complaining of unfair treatment and pregnancy discrimination. She subsequently made claims in the Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal, and pregnancy and maternity discrimination.

The decision of the Employment Tribunal in Lewandowski v Bradford District Apprenticeship Training Academy

The Employment Tribunal upheld Mrs Deol’s claims for pregnancy discrimination (section 18 Equality Act 2010), unfair dismissal, and automatic unfair dismissal (section 99 Employment Rights Act 1996).

Pregnancy and maternity discrimination

The Tribunal found that there was sufficient facts for the Tribunal to come to a conclusion that the reason for Ms Lewandowski’s dismissal was her pregnancy: an analysis of the viability of the business had been undertaken, she had been offered a new contract on the basis of that analysis, that after the business was made aware of her pregnancy that contract offer was withdrawn, and that the business had failed to offer an adequate explanation as to why the decision was made to terminate Ms Lewandowski’s contract. The Tribunal also held that it did not find BDATA’s witnesses credible due to conflicts between their witness evidence and the documentary evidence.

Unfair dismissal

The Tribunal found that Ms Lewandowski’s dismissal was both substantively and procedurally unfair: there was no warning, no consultation, no selection process followed, no selection procedure, and no appeal.

Remedy

The Employment Tribunal awarded Ms Lewandowski:

  • £8,454.08 in respect of financial losses between 31 March 2016 and 31 March 2017, together with interest of £676.33
  • £15,000 in respect of injury to feelings, together with six months’ interest of £600
  • £300 in respect of loss of statutory rights
  • Reimbursement of Tribunal fees (£435)

Our solicitors’ view on Lewandowski v Bradford District Apprenticeship Training Academy

Chris Hadrill, a specialist employment solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “Employers must not dismiss employees because they are pregnant or because they have taken (or are taking or intend to take) a period of maternity leave) – such treatment would not only constitute pregnancy discrimination but also automatically unfair dismissal.”

The judgment of the Employment Tribunal can be found here.

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees Call 020 3397 3603 to speak to one of the members of our employment team or email us on enquiries@redmans.co.uk. Redmans have offices in Richmond, Chiswick, Hammersmith, Fulham, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Kings Cross and Marylebone (meetings strictly by appointment only).

Want to talk to an expert employment law solicitor?

You'll receive a callback from a specialist within an hour

Share →

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk

Testimonials

4.67 Average

66 Reviews

Anonymous

As with All solicitors advice without consequence but understood and communicated my legal position

Posted 6 days ago

Anonymous

Prompt, professional and excellent service.

Posted 1 week ago

Dominic C

Excellent service, prompt and helpful

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

I found Redman’s to be very efficient and got me the best deal available in the short time scale that was available.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Victor L

Very professional. Provided excellent advice on my Settlement agreement.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Anonymous

Professional from start to finish.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Oliver W

Excellent service provided by Redmans, will certainly consider using again.

Posted 2 weeks ago

Melanie H

Very professional and extremely personable service. Thank you very much.

Posted 4 weeks ago

Anonymous

I found Chris to be very approachable and easy to speak with about complex matters. He took action quickly and his updates to me, as his client, were prompt. I would recommend Chris and the team at Redmans without hesitation.

Posted 4 weeks ago

Anonymous

Good advice

Posted 4 weeks ago

Anonymous

Overall happy with the service provided by Chris and Rana.

Posted 4 weeks ago

Anonymous

Chris and Rana provide a great service, very informed, diligent and care about your result, would recommend Redmans

Posted 4 weeks ago

David W

A speedy efficient friendly service, I would definitely recommend Redmans Solicitors for processing Settlement Agreements.

Posted 4 weeks ago

Anonymous

Both Rana and Chris were fantastic. From the first phone call I was confident my matter was in good hands. I was not disappointed. I would highly recommend Redmans. Thank you again for all of your support and advice.

Posted 1 month ago

Federico S

Great advices and communication. Through Redmana I obtained match more than what I thought. Highly recommended

Posted 1 month ago

Tom G

A good and efficient service with the required legal advice provided for a settlement agreement.

Posted 1 month ago

Francis T

The solicitor I used was Chris Hadrill, who I found extremely professional and I felt that he made me feel at ease, considering the subject matter he was assisting me with.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Chris provided excellent assistance with the negotiation of my settlement agreement. From start to finish, I was consitently updated and advised on the best course of action to take. I would highly recommend Chris and Redmans Solicitors.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

They are busy people but manage well so generally I would recommend them.

Posted 1 month ago

Anonymous

Very efficient and professional service from my first phone call making an enquiry. Timescales of the matter in hand were met and within the agreed budget. Would highly recommend Redmans

Posted 1 month ago

Lisa B

Really very good service, always available to answer questions, provide my with any information I needed to make informed decisions.

Posted 1 month ago