Resources: Blogs

“No one puts baby in a corner”

Blogs
|

FWC finds pregnancy not a valid reason for dismissal

There are a range of laws in Australia that protect people who are pregnant from discrimination and most employers are aware that pregnancy related discrimination in the workplace is unlawful. However, assumptions about the capacity of pregnant employees are often made without proper expert advice and unfortunately we are still seeing employers unlawfully act against the interests of pregnant employees.

There are a range of laws in Australia that protect people who are pregnant from discrimination and most employers are aware that pregnancy related discrimination in the workplace is unlawful. However, assumptions about the capacity of pregnant employees are often made without proper expert advice and unfortunately we are still seeing employers unlawfully act against the interests of pregnant employees.

In a recent decision, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) considered whether the pregnancy of an employee was a valid reason for dismissal from a job that the employer did not consider appropriate for a pregnant person.

In Morgan v Heritage Motels and Restaurants [2016] FWC 4842 a pregnant motel manager was dismissed by her employer over the phone after she called him to provide an update about her progress and return to work following sick leave.

In the lead up to her dismissal, the employee had suffered from nausea, muscle aches and had collapsed at work after her back muscles seized up. She subsequently took sick leave to recover and called her employer to discuss her return to work date. During that phone call the employer told the employee, “This isn’t a job for a pregnant person. I would hate for you to have a miscarriage here so I think you should finish up.”

The employee protested and said that she had several months of work left before she intended to take maternity leave to which the employer responded that he wanted her to finish up. The employee asked if he was firing her because she was pregnant, to which he answered “Yep.”

In reaching a conclusion about whether a dismissal is unfair, the FWC must be satisfied that the dismissal was harsh, unjust or unreasonable, including an assessment of whether there was a valid reason for the dismissal related to the employee’s conduct or capacity. A valid reason must be one that is sound, defensible and well-founded, and not capricious, fanciful, spiteful or prejudiced.

Unsurprisingly, the FWC found that the employee’s pregnancy was not a valid reason for her dismissal and that there were significant procedural deficiencies in the way the employee was dismissed.

The FWC held that the employee was unfairly dismissed and it awarded her compensation.

This case demonstrates that some employers continue to make assumptions about the work capacity of pregnant employees without proper advice. Employers should always avoid treating pregnant employees less favourable to non-pregnant employees, and in particular should not dismiss an employee because they are pregnant.

 

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

 

Similar articles

Commission finds failure to consult meant dismissal was not a genuine redundancy

When you assume

In a recent decision, the Fair Work Commission has emphasised that an employer’s obligations to consult during the redundancy process under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) is not a mere procedural formality, but a mandatory requirement for genuine redundancy.

Read more...

FWC orders reinstatement despite valid reason for dismissal

It was a one-off

It is important that employers carefully consider and weigh any mitigating factors when undertaking disciplinary processes. A fair and balanced approach ensures that behavioural risks in the workplace are managed effectively without losing sight of the broader context in which the behaviour occurred.

Read more...

Managing ill and injured workers

In her usual entertaining and informative style, our Managing Director and Principal, Athena Koelmeyer, will guide employers through the tangled web of legislative obligations they face when dealing with an ill or injured employee.

Read more...

Contractor and customer ordered to pay compensation and pecuniary penalties to harassed employee

The Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) was amended in 2023 to prohibit sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia recently made declarations that a contractor and a customer had breached the FW Act by sexually harassing an employee.

Read more...

Employer’s inaction in responding to proven sexual misconduct left employee with no choice but to resign

Forced over-Board

A resignation that is “forced” due to the employer’s conduct may be considered a “dismissal” within the meaning of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), thereby granting the employee access to the unfair dismissal or general protections jurisdictions.

Read more...

Control in the independent contractor relations

Ctrl key

In determining whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor, courts and tribunals are required to assess the “real substance, practical reality and true nature” of the relationship, per s 15AA of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in workplace law and sports law.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.

Subscribe

* indicates required