Ms A McKnight v F47 Ltd and WBI Ltd (Scotland : Contract of Employment)

Factual and Procedural Background

The Claimant was employed by the Second Respondent from 15 November 2020 until dismissal on 20 May 2022. Initially employed as a barperson at an establishment operated by the Second Respondent, the Claimant was later promoted to Assistant Manager at another nearby restaurant, also understood to be owned by the Second Respondent. The Claimant discovered she was pregnant in mid-January 2022 and informed her manager shortly thereafter. Following this, the Claimant experienced a reduction in offered work hours and a lack of adequate engagement from her employer regarding pregnancy accommodations, maternity leave, and pay arrangements.

The Claimant attempted to communicate with the employer's HR representative multiple times in May 2022 and was informed on 20 May 2022 that she had been dismissed, which was the first notification she received. Neither Respondent appeared or submitted a response to the claim. The tribunal heard evidence solely from the Claimant, who was found credible and reliable.

The claim involved allegations of detriment and unfavourable treatment due to pregnancy, automatic unfair dismissal on grounds of pregnancy, and failure to provide a written statement of employment terms.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the Claimant was an employee of either or both Respondents up to 20 May 2022;
2. If so, which entity or entities was/were her employer;
3. When the employer became aware of the Claimant's pregnancy;
4. Whether the employer subjected the Claimant to detriment relating to pregnancy contrary to section 47C of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and/or unfavourable treatment under section 18 of the Equality Act 2010, including overlooking her for work or shifts, ostracising her, or failing to engage with her;
5. Whether the Claimant was dismissed by reason of pregnancy or maternity;
6. Whether the employer failed to provide a written statement of terms and conditions compliant with section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996;
7. What compensatory awards, if any, should be made for successful complaints, including injury to feelings and declarations.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the Claimant was continuously employed by the Second Respondent throughout the relevant period, including when transferred between establishments. The employer became aware of the Claimant's pregnancy by late January 2022 through direct communication with a managerial employee.

The tribunal upheld the Claimant's allegations that she was subjected to detriment and unfavourable treatment because of her pregnancy, specifically by being offered fewer shifts despite confirming availability and by inadequate engagement regarding pregnancy accommodations, maternity leave, and pay arrangements. These findings were grounded in the employer’s knowledge of the pregnancy and related illness.

Regarding dismissal, the tribunal concluded that the Claimant was dismissed due to her pregnancy, constituting automatic unfair dismissal under section 99 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The absence of any other explanation or prior indication from the employer supported this conclusion.

The tribunal also found that the employer failed to provide a written statement of terms and conditions of employment as required by section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The purported statement was only provided during settlement negotiations and was not seen by the Claimant during employment, further undermining the employer’s compliance.

In determining remedies, the tribunal awarded compensation for injury to feelings based on established legal guidance, interest on the award from the dismissal date, and compensation for past and future financial loss including statutory maternity pay the Claimant would likely have received but for the dismissal. An additional award was made for failure to provide the written statement of terms and conditions, with interest applied.

Holding and Implications

The tribunal held that:

• The Claimant was an employee of the Second Respondent at all material times;
• The Claimant was subjected to detriment and unfavourable treatment due to pregnancy under relevant statutory provisions;
• The Claimant was automatically unfairly dismissed because of her pregnancy;
• The employer failed to provide a compliant written statement of terms and conditions;
• Compensation and declarations were awarded accordingly, including injury to feelings, financial loss, and statutory penalties.

The direct effect of this decision is a financial award to the Claimant and a formal declaration of unlawful treatment and dismissal by the employer. The tribunal did not establish new legal precedent but applied existing statutory protections and compensation principles to the facts presented.