Mrs S Sisk v Mr C Rickwood and Department for Work and Pensions: 3301882/2023 and 3308083/2023
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s three allegations of victimisation set out below are struck out as having no reasonable prospects of success: 1.1. The Second Respondent was ordered by the Employment Tribunal (ET) to roll out maternity training for managers. When the Claimant asked around the 16 July 2017 why it had not been rolled out, she was told by her then line manager Mark Paine not to ask the question as it might ‘upset’ the manager who was responsible for conducting the discrimination against her, Mr Richards; 1.2. On the 31.10.17, the Claimant attended an event held by a charity called ‘Pregnant then Screwed’ who help people who are experiencing maternity discrimination. She gave a media interview about her previous discrimination claim against the Second Respondent. On the 18 December 2017 Mr Richards (a witness for the Second Respondent in the case) told her through her then line manager Mark Paine that because she had given a media interview about the case, it was being referred to HR for possible disciplinary proceedings. In early January 2018, Mr Richards was told by HR that there was no case to answer, but Mr Richards didn’t pass this information onto the Claimant for some time, causing undue stress and anxiety for several months; and, 10.2 Judgment - rule 61 February Case No: 3301882/2023 3308083/2023 1.3. After the ET, at the beginning of September 2020, attempting to force the Claimant back into the same role (Compliance Manager) that the Tribunal had found was discriminatory for the DWP to return the Claimant to after her maternity leave.[2]The claimant’s remaining allegations of victimisation, as well as her claims for harassment related to disability, and disability and race discrimination, are still live and are currently listed for a hearing on 10-17 February 2025.