Mum defends firm in sex discrimination case

Trusted article source icon
Friday, November 28, 2008
Profile image for This is Bristol

This is Bristol

by Julie Harding

A partner in a Bristol recruitment firm which isaccused of sexual discrimination told an industrial tribunal she was allowed to work part-time after having children and was not penalised as a result.

Kirsten Bye returned to Clifton-based Cavendish Maine four days a week after having her first baby in 2005 and is currently on maternity leave after her second child.

Former consultant Emma Archer, who had two children in quick succession, has taken Cavendish Maine to a Bristol industrial tribunal claiming she was forced out of a job she loved after she asked to work part time.

Mrs Archer, a mother-of-three from Long Ashton, is claiming sex discrimination, unfair dismissal and discrimination for asserting maternity rights. She also claims that she was not given a contract and that Cavendish Maine was in breach of contract.

Mrs Bye, who lives in Bath, told the tribunal: "Cavendish Maine allowed me to work partly from home which made life easier. I came into the office once every two weeks.

"I've been with the business for nine years. It's a very good culture to work in."

Mrs Bye, a friend of senior partner Nick Hester, did not accept that the senior partners had been trying to get rid of Mrs Archer.

But email evidence emerged at the tribunal which showed that this was discussed.

An email from a staff member talked of the company taking a "belt and braces approach if the ultimate aim is to extract her (Mrs Archer) from the business".

Cross examining Mr Hester, Fiona Farquhar representing Mrs Archer, said: "It is quite clear to anyone reading that email that you were having discussions to extract my client from the business.

Mr Hester replied: "No, not at all."

He told the tribunal he had been looking forward to having Mrs Archer back and that he thought he had been very accommodating by allowing her to work three days a week.

An email between staff members talked of senior male partners being "not at all clued up" about maternity rights and one said: "this will cost us a fortune" while a third spoke of the company seeking legal advice in relation to Mrs Archer.

Mr Hester dismissed the emails as office gossip. Mrs Archer went on maternity leave in January 2005 and, after having her daughter Ava, returned to work three days a week in January 2006. In September that year she took a second period of maternity leave, returning in October 2007.

She claimed she was made to feel unwelcome and in December she was singled out for redundancy, a process which was suspended when she challenged it.

She claims the final straw came when she overheard Nick Hester talking about her on his mobile phone and describing her as "a pain in the neck".

Wayne Smith told the tribunal he had called Mr Hester at the time the call took place to talk about an ongoing deal.

Cavendish Maine denies that it discriminated against Mrs Archer.

The tribunal continues.

16
Tweet this article
Report

16 Comments

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Ruby, West End

    Saturday, November 29 2008, 5:45AM

    “This story is about revenge and greed of one person. What started the revenge we will never know, I suspect like most mothers guilt at leaving children at home.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Jason, Wick

    Friday, November 28 2008, 10:29PM

    “Everyone seems to be getting the wrong end of the stick. The case is not about her employers allowing her to work part time on return from her maternity leave; Mrs Archer worked on a part time basis in between her second and third children, and after the birth of third child for several months. Nor is it about taking maternity leave, which Mrs Archer took on two occasions. Perhaps the truth will out when the court has made its decision.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by margaret, bristol

    Friday, November 28 2008, 5:16PM

    “I dont know emma archer but i have worked for cavendish maine for 7 months and in that time i have found them to be very professional and approachable and have gone out of their way to help me not the picture emma archer describes1”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by Amanda, Bristol

    Friday, November 28 2008, 5:02PM

    “CT
    You're not really on the same wave length are you? This is about whether this lady was made redundant because of her taking maternity leave, not some trivia about visiting mum and dad or your cat!
    If there were provision within the law, and you were entitled to visit mum and dad or your cat, then you may have been made redundant because of it, then you may well have a case! Just because you think, or I certainly get the impression that you think, for some unknown reason, that maternity leave is wrong, doesn't change the fact that there is a chance Emma may have lost her job because of it, which, like it or not, is against the Law.”

  • Profile image for This is Bristol

    by CT, BRIStol

    Friday, November 28 2008, 4:17PM

    “I think i'll ask my boss on monday if i can work when i like as i'd like to see more of my parents and spend more time with my cat. I think i know the reaction. Some people just take the michael.”

        Add your comments

        max 4000 characters
         
         
         
         
         
         

        Tell us about your area

        Got some interesting news? Write about it and let your whole community know.

          Write an article