A pregnant Pakistani healthcare worker who lost her job because patients ‘couldn’t understand her accent’ has won more than £50,000 in a discrimination claim.
Zoia Fatima was dismissed after facing numerous complaints at the private medical scanning clinics where she worked, her employers told a tribunal.
However, the panel rejected this explanation, concluding instead that she had been ‘singled out’ for redundancy within days of telling bosses she was pregnant.
She has now been awarded £51,217 in compensation for pregnancy discrimination and victimisation after starting legal proceedings against the firm.
The hearing in Manchester was told Mrs Fatima started working for Mediscan Diagnostic Services as a healthcare assistant in November 2019.
It was heard she worked up to six days a week in their clinics in Bolton, Bradford and Wigan.
The panel was told management received ‘a lot of negative feedback’ about Mrs Fatima on their patient feedback forms, particularly that they couldn’t ‘understand her accent’.
Bosses claimed this was taken ‘into account’ in the decision to dismiss Mrs Fatima but no formal action was taken at the time.
They also claimed there was ‘conflict’ between her and other members of the clinical team as well as unauthorised absences as she revised to take a nursing exam.
In October 2020, she told superiors she was pregnant, including her manager – identified in the tribunal’s judgement only as Mrs Khan.
Mrs Khan wrote to chief executive Dr Muhammad Eshan and HR to tell them that Mrs Fatima had requested part-time working, something the healthcare worker denied.
Dr Eshan told the panel that as a result of the pandemic, the business reduced in size ‘dramatically’ and he made part-time staff redundant as ‘a priority’.
‘He understood, wrongly, that [Mrs Fatima] had asked for part-time working because of her pregnancy,’ the hearing was told.
The panel heard when HR asked what Mrs Khan’s plans were with Mrs Fatima, she replied: ‘I don’t need her I’m overstaffed.’
The tribunal ruled Mrs Fatima has been ‘singled out for redundancy’ by Mrs Khan and Dr Eshan in priority to the rest of the health care assistants.
In November 2020, Mrs Fatima was notified by HR that she was at risk of redundancy and, at a later meeting, that she would be dismissed and told to return to ‘your country’.
The tribunal heard she found this ‘extremely distressing and stressful’ and ‘particularly difficult’ because she was pregnant.
She was sent a dismissal letter in November 2020 and refused the chance to appeal it.
In January 2021, she began tribunal proceedings and made claims of maternity and sex discrimination.
The panel heard Mrs Fatima telephoned Mrs Khan in late 2022 to ask her if she could improve her reference, as it was in danger of losing her much wanted role with the NHS.
It was heard Mrs Khan said words to the effect of ‘don’t expect a good reference after everything that’s happened between us’.
Employment Judge Rachel Barker said: ‘We conclude the trigger for her redundancy selection was the notification of her pregnancy and the perception that she wanted to go part time, and for no other reason.
‘She was singled out from the other HCAs for dismissal within a few days of informing [Mediscan] of her pregnancy.
‘No reason was given to Mrs Fatima for her selection for redundancy other than the needs of the business.’
Ruling that she had been successful in her pregnancy discrimination claim, she continued: ‘What is clear is that [Mrs Fatima] was singled out from these others within a very short time of informing the respondent of her pregnancy.
‘We find that she was treated less favourably because she was pregnant.’
Addressing her victimisation claim, Judge Barker added that it was ‘universally very critical and negative’.
‘Mrs Fatima also consistently and credibly described her conversation with Mrs Khan in late 2022 in which she said that Mrs Fatima could not expect a good reference because of what had gone on between them.
‘By that stage, the Tribunal proceedings had progressed significantly.
‘We find that Mrs Khan took great personal exception to Mrs Fatima having brought a claim in which she was mentioned.
‘We find that she did not consider that Mrs Fatima had any right to complain about her treatment by [Mediscan].’
The panel found it was an act of victimisation ‘in retaliation’ for Mrs Fatima having issued tribunal proceedings in which Mrs Khan was named.