Removing staff who are on maternity leave from work WhatsApp groups is discrimination

Removing female staff from work WhatsApp group chats whilst they are on maternity leave is discrimination, an employment tribunal has ruled.

Depriving mothers who have taken time off work to have babies of interaction with their colleagues is “isolating”, the panel concluded.

This means an employer who decides to exclude women from staff chats they were previously part of is in breach of equality laws.

The ruling came after Asha Lad sued her dental firm employers for pregnancy discrimination after a male senior colleague refused to let her back into a work WhatsApp group while she was on maternity leave.

Her colleague insisted there was “no reason” for her to have access to it while off.

But the sales negotiator told the tribunal this left her feeling isolated as she could not keep up with work matters, or engage in the “general chatter” of the group.

‘Less favourable’ and ‘detrimental’ treatment

Now, she is in line for compensation after the tribunal agreed she had been unfairly treated and upheld her claim.

Employment Judge Rob Childe said: “We find that those that are on maternity leave and therefore likely to be away from the normal day-to-day interactions that they would have with colleagues, are likely to feel isolated from their employer and their colleagues.

“For some employees this isolation will be welcome but for many others it will not be.

“A team or group WhatsApp chat is a way for those individuals to keep in touch with their colleagues on a personal and professional level and to keep up to date with what is going on in their organisation.

“This is particularly so where, as in this case, the group WhatsApp chat involves the sharing of personal news and information from colleagues as well as work news.

He added that the individual on maternity leave can choose whether to engage in a staff WhatsApp chat, and that a “unilateral decision” on the part of an employer to remove them has the effect of “isolating them from their colleagues and organisation”.

“We find, judged by our industrial experience of working life, that this is reasonably and objectively to be viewed as less favourable treatment for someone on maternity leave and detrimental treatment.”

The Birmingham hearing was told that Ms Lad started working for Lily Head Dental Practice Sales Limited in Oct 2018.

The small company, which employs around 10 members of staff, is based in Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, and sells dental practices.

Work phones were supplied to staff and they were used to exchange both business and personal messages, the tribunal heard.

Pregnancy and maternity discrimination

Ms Lad first went on maternity leave from the company in Jan 2021.

In September she shared a picture of her baby bump to the work group chat and in response, “her colleagues commented on it, in very complimentary terms”.

Later that month, the company’s commercial director, Chris Mayor, informed everyone in the group that Ms Lad was going to be induced to give birth.

“These were examples of personal rather than business content on the WhatsApp group chat,” the tribunal found.

In July of last year, whilst on her second period of maternity leave, Ms Lad lost her phone and requested a replacement phone or SIM card so she could continue to access the company systems and the WhatsApp group chat.

However, Mr Mayor refused to replace Ms Lads’ work phone or provide her with a replacement SIM and phone number.

Soon after she was excluded, Ms Lad wrote an email to Mr Mayor stating: “I remain upset regarding initial emails denying access to data on my work phone.

“You/company are aware that in doing so you are excluding me (employee on maternity leave) from the Whatsapp group chat, preventing access to my personal data on the phone.”

Mr Mayor replied: “You clearly did not want or need to be involved in the work Whatsapp group as you removed yourself.”

EJ Childe said: “The net effect of the [company’s] actions were that she had no access to the WhatsApp group chat from July 2023 onwards, when she first requested this.”

Mr Mayor told the tribunal he did not add her back because he had “security concerns” and thought there was “no reason” for her to have her phone.

But, the tribunal disputed this and concluded company bosses did “not put forward a credible non-discriminatory reason” as to why she was not provided a SIM card to access the WhatsApp chat.

It upheld Ms Lad’s complaint of pregnancy and maternity discrimination, and victimisation, in relation to her exclusion from the WhatsApp chat.

Additional claims she made of race discrimination, pregnancy discrimination, victimisation and unauthorised wage deductions were dismissed.

A remedy hearing to decide Ms Lads’ compensation will be held at a later date.

Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month, then enjoy 1 year for just $9 with our US-exclusive offer.