Mothercare breached maternity rights of own employee, tribunal rules

Baby products brand Mothercare breached the maternity rights of an employee when it sacked her and replaced her with a man, an employment tribunal has ruled.

The retailer, which is described on its website as being “passionate about helping parents and children create their life stories”, invented a “sham” redundancy situation to get rid of the mother, the tribunal found.

Technical manager Nichola Osborn took the company to an employment tribunal and won her claim of unfair dismissal.

The tribunal ruled she had been treated unfavourably because she was on maternity leave.

Mothercare sells its ranges through retail giant Boots in the UK, and has franchised stores across the globe.

The business went into administration in 2019, but the franchise arm of the business remained as Mothercare Global Brand.

A Watford employment tribunal heard Mrs Osborn was sacked in December 2021, having worked for the company since 2016.

When she became pregnant in 2019, she asked her manager if she should start looking for maternity cover, but was told it would not be necessary, the tribunal was told.

In 2020, bosses brought Karen Tyler into the company as chief product officer, and she began restructuring, the panel heard.

Ms Tyler had met technical director Chris Beeley while working at children’s retailer Mammas & Pappas, and wanted to bring him into Mothercare, the tribunal heard.

While Mrs Osborn was still on maternity leave in 2020, “Karen Tyler decided she wanted to replace her with Chris Beeley”, Employment Judge Alliott concluded.

“We find that Karen Tyler, probably in conjunction with Chris Beeley, then set about managing Mrs Osborn out of the business.”

Under UK law, pregnant employees are protected from discrimination until the end of their maternity leave and must have the right to return to work.

Mrs Osborn was told she was being made redundant after the restructuring, and she was not offered any suitable alternative role within the company, the panel was told.

“We have found the alleged redundancy situation was a sham,” the judge said.

Mrs Osborn’s additional claims of automatic unfair dismissal and sex discrimination were dismissed.