Pregnancy Discrimination and Compensation

17 January 2025

Pregnancy Discrimination and Compensation

Boardside Law has acted for both employees and employers in pregnancy related disputes.


In one such case Tribunal recently, we were instructed by a talented artist, who had been dismissed from her role as a designer, one week after informing her employer that she was pregnant.


Her case bears a striking resemblance to the recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision in Shakil v Samsons Ltd, which serves as a crucial reminder of the legal protections afforded to pregnant employees and the significant consequences for employers who fail to uphold their obligations.


Background


Ms. Shakil, an accountant/bookkeeper who had worked for her employer for around 6 months, alleged she was subjected to discriminatory treatment by her employer, Samsons Ltd, after taking time off due to morning sickness.  Samsons Ltd reduced her hours of work without notice, criticised her capability and conduct, placed her at risk of redundancy (citing a downturn in work), and dismissed her one day before she was due to go on maternity leave. Among her claims, Ms. Shakil highlighted exclusion from key meetings, and negative comments made by her manager, suggesting her pregnancy was an "inconvenience" to the business.


Ms. Shakil’s claim of discrimination was successful. The Tribunal found that:


  • Ms. Shakil had been treated unfavourably due to her pregnancy, contrary to the Equality Act 2010;
  • the employer’s actions created a hostile work environment, and the redundancy was a sham which was motivated by Ms. Shakil’s pregnancy.


Ms. Shakil appealed the amount of compensation she was awarded (£5,000). The EAT agreed with Ms. Shakil that the initial award by the Tribunal was ‘totally flawed’, not least because the Tribunal had not taken into account the ‘Vento Bands’ (see below). The EAT increased the amount of compensation for injury to Ms. Shakil’s feelings, stating: ‘This [was] not a case in which there was one-off treatment that would be likely to result only in limited injury to feelings.’ (Ref: [2024]EAT 192).


The Vento Guidelines

The Vento Guidelines are used to assess the amount of compensation in cases of discrimination or harassment, based on factors such as injury to feelings. They categorise compensation levels for injury to feelings into three bands, which are currently as follows:


  1. Lower Band: £1,200 to £11,700 - for less serious cases, where the act of discrimination or harassment is found to have a limited impact on the claimant.
  2. Middle Band: £11,700 to £35,200 - for cases that are more serious.
  3. Upper Band: £35,200 to £58,700 - for the most serious cases of discrimination, harassment, or victimisation, where the impact on the claimant is significant.


In exceptional cases the level of compensation could be even higher. An award of injury to feelings compensates a ‘victim’ for subjective feelings of, by way of example, upset, frustration, worry, anxiety, mental distress, fear, grief, anguish, humiliation, unhappiness, stress, and depression.


Employers should bear in mind that the purpose of the award is to compensate a claimant for harm caused rather than to punish the respondent. When considering likely compensation, it is important to assess the impact upon the actual individual involved, because unlawful discriminatory behaviour may affect different individuals differently. Overt discrimination and the conduct of the employer is likely to increase the level of injury to feelings, however. Such conduct can include defending the claim in an inappropriate manner, which can be a reason for the Tribunal to award an increased amount for the level of injury to feelings.


Key Takeaways for Employers


  1. Proactive Training: managers and HR teams must be trained to handle pregnancy-related matters sensitively and within the legal framework.
  2. Inclusive Work Practices: pregnant employees should not face any reduction in responsibilities or exclusion from opportunities unless explicitly requested by the employee.
  3. Documentation: employers should maintain clear records of communications and decisions to demonstrate fair treatment if disputes arise.



This case underscores the importance of fostering an inclusive culture and ensuring compliance with the Equality Act to avoid costly litigation and reputational damage. Boardside Law can provide advice and guidance to employers in relation to the financial impact of individual cases.





Please share Boardside's expertise and insights with colleagues and associates. Thank you.

Working closely with you, we can navigate the hurdles you face, to build a stronger business and to achieve commercial advantage. Call us for an initial conversation on 0330 0949338

29 August 2025
Autumn pressures ahead? Navigating workforce expectations 
29 August 2025
UK Business Immigration: the next wave of change 
29 August 2025
Sexual Harassment: when do social spaces become ‘The Workplace’?
29 August 2025
Whistleblowing: Post-Employment Protections Clarified
11 July 2025
As part of its ongoing corporate transparency reforms, Companies House is introducing two important compliance requirements that directors and company secretaries should be aware of, one immediate, and one longer-term. Director ID Verification – Coming This Autumn From Autumn 2025, all company directors will be legally required to verify their identity with Companies House. This is part of the implementation of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, aimed at reducing fraud and improving corporate accountability. The process will involve confirming your identity through the Companies House portal or via an authorised third party. For UK nationals with a passport and standard secondary ID, the process is expected to be quick and fully digital. Directors who fail to verify their identity will be committing an offence and may be unable to act in that capacity until verification is complete. Boardside Law will become an authorised provider to carry out this process on behalf of clients. If this would be of interest to you, please let us know. Paper Accounts to Be Phased Out by April 2027 From 1 April 2027, Companies House will no longer accept paper accounts. All companies, including micro-entities and dormant companies, will be required to file accounts using compatible accounting software. This applies to: Audited and unaudited accounts Limited companies, LLPs and charitable entities Group accounts and subsidiaries Although the change is nearly two years away, we recommend that companies with financial year ends of 31 December or 31 March treat the 2026 accounting period as the transition year. This allows time to get familiar with digital filing tools ahead of the April 2027 deadline. A full list of compatible software providers is available here: gov.uk/software-company-accounts/y/audited/group There are also separate links for LLPs and charities. What You Should Do Now Directors: Watch out for further announcements about ID verification and ensure you complete this when required. Company Secretaries / Finance Teams: Review your current filing method and speak to your accountant about moving to compliant software if you haven’t already. If you would like advice on preparing your company for these reforms, or support with managing director filings or company secretarial duties, the Boardside team is here to help.
10 July 2025
Whistleblowing: Reform on the Horizon 
10 July 2025
The Government is backing a proposed major amendment to the Employment Rights Bill that would render certain non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) unenforceable. Specifically, the amendment targets clauses that prevent individuals from speaking out about unlawful behaviour, such as harassment, discrimination, sexual misconduct or bullying. This shift follows sustained criticism of how NDAs have been used to cover up workplace misconduct and protect serial offenders, particularly in high-profile sectors like media, technology and education. While the aim is to protect victims, the change could have unintended consequences for employers. If confidentiality can no longer be assured, some employers may be less inclined to settle disputes at all, which could in itself drive more claims to an Employment Tribunal. The proposals in terms of voiding certain agreements would also extend to employment contracts and internal policies, not just settlement agreements. What Is Changing? The proposed reform (an amendment to the Employment Rights Bill), which was tabled in Parliament on 7 July 2025, would: void any contractual clause that seeks to prevent a person from disclosing misconduct; apply not only to settlement agreements but also, potentially, to employment contracts, policy documents, and confidentiality agreements; introduce civil penalties for employers or advisers who breach the new provisions. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner has stated that the purpose is to prevent NDAs from being used as “gagging clauses” that silence victims. Why This Matters for Employers: Fewer settlements? Without confidentiality, some employers may feel less secure in offering financial settlements to resolve complaints. Loss of control over reputation management: Public disclosure could increase the reputational risks for employers, particularly in unresolved or disputed allegations. Employee voice strengthened: The change would empower employees to speak out, but some may prefer private resolution. Removing this option may reduce flexibility. Boardside's View: We support the main aim of increasing transparency and preventing misuse of legal tool agreements which genuinely help parties resolve employment-based issues. We certainly accept that employers should not be allowed to abuse their positions. However, we share concerns that an outright ban may discourage settlement and create uncertainty for all parties. Action Points: Review all current template agreements and HR policies. Train HR teams and line managers on the lawful use of confidentiality provisions. Keep a close eye on the final form of the legislation as it progresses through Parliament. Boardside Law can support you in adapting your internal documents and approach to reflect the likely changes, as well as keeping you updated on the final wording and timeline of implementation. Contact us
8 July 2025
AI and algorithmic decision-making is now deeply embedded in recruitment, performance tracking, and even disciplinary decisions. But the legal risks around automated decision-making is still evolving, and employers face serious compliance risks. What does the law say? Under UK GDPR, employees have the right not to be subject to solely automated decisions that have a significant effect on them. This includes decisions about recruitment (for example, CV screening by AI), disciplinary or capability outcomes, and performance rankings. Where such processing occurs, employers must: Provide meaningful information about the logic involved. Offer the right to obtain human intervention. Enable the individual to contest the decision. Key Risks Discrimination: biased data can lead to unlawful outcomes. Lack of transparency and explainability: AI systems are often ‘black boxes’, making it difficult to explain how decisions are made. Lack of documentation: employers may struggle to prove compliance without a proper audit trail. Failure to notify or offer human review. What employers should do Audit your use of AI tools in HR processes. Ensure there is always a human in the loop. Ensure transparency and accountability mechanisms are in place. Update internal data protection policies and privacy notices. Provide training to HR and senior leadership on AI compliance and ethical considerations. Boardside can support you in designing ethical and legally compliant approaches to AI in the workplace. Call us on 0330 0949338
3 July 2025
What You Need to Know Before 22 July
13 May 2025
Immigration Reforms: What Employers Need to Know 
More posts