A former recruitment consultant whose employment was terminated as a result of her pregnancy has been awarded €136,200 in compensation.
The Workplace Relations Commission ruled that a Dublin-based recruitment firm, Eteam Workforce, discriminated against recruitment consultant, Raquel Vieira Dos Santos Silva, on grounds of gender related to her pregnancy.
The company, which trades as eTeam, had denied that it had breached the Employment Equality Act 1998 and claimed that Ms Dos Santos Silva was let go after a client firm did not wish to renew her contract.
Ms Dos Santos Silva joined the company in December 2022 on a full-time permanent contract with a monthly salary of €5,200 until she was dismissed on February 29th 2024 while on maternity leave.
She told the WRC that she notified her employer in July 2023 that she was pregnant.
Ms Dos Santos Silva said she was informed ten days later that she would be receiving an addendum to her contract of employment which referred to an extension of duties from December 2023 until the end of February 2024 – the same month she was due to go on maternity leave.
She gave evidence that she refused to sign this addendum and was told that she would not be paid for the two months if she did not sign it.
Ms Dos Santos Silva said she felt forced to sign the addendum under duress after the company repeatedly contacted her about the issue due to the threat of the loss of income immediately before she was due to give birth to her child.
She accused eTeam of also failing to put any correspondence about her employment in writing.
In her ruling WRC adjudication officer, Gaye Cunningham noted the company had moved to change Ms Dos Santos Silva’s contract of employment ten days after she had informed her managers that she was pregnant in July 2023.
Eteam Workforce claimed it had made an error in omitting an end date to her contract of employment.
The company said it was the wish of a client not to renew Ms X’s contract when her contract came to an end in February 2024.
However, Ms Cunningham said eTeam had provided no documents to support its claim that the company had regularly been seeking alternative roles for her at the time.
She observed that to unilaterally change the terms of contract of an employee is a serious matter.
Ms Cunningham said the unilateral change to Ms Dos Santos Silva’s contract was “particularly egregious” when she had notified her employer of her pregnancy.
She also noted that the complainant had been put under pressure to sign an amended contract.
The WRC ordered eTeam to pay the former consultant €124,800 compensation for the effects of the discrimination and a further €11,400 in respect of loss of earnings.
