Mum wins sex discrimination case against law firm that sacked her during maternity leave and shredded the evidence
Bina Hale, 36, told a sex discrimination employment tribunal of the treatment she received from her bosses at Dentons in Milton Keynes
A MOTHER has won a legal battle against the world's largest law firm after they axed her job her while on maternity leave and then destroyed the evidence.
Tearful Bina Hale, 36, told a sex discrimination employment tribunal of the treatment she received from her bosses at Dentons in Milton Keynes.
The former recruitment manager revealed how she was picked for redundancy during a meeting before she had the chance to return to work.
The tribunal was told handwritten bullet points from the discussion about her future had since been shredded.
However, Human resources manager Suzanne Barnes claimed she only destroyed the notes because she liked to work in a paperless office.
Mrs Hale's line manager Emma Rowe was rebuffed by the judge after producing a single piece of white paper at the tribunal which she claimed was from the notebook she used to make notes in the meeting.
The judge is then said to have blasted the firm for a lack of honesty and credibility.
The Times reports he told Ms Rowe: "None of this is credible . . . a firm of lawyers ought to know that."
Speaking after the hearing, Mrs Hale said women should not be afraid of confronting discrimination.
"I strongly urge women who have been subject to similar treatment to seek justice and speak out and stop such employers taking advantage of women at a very vulnerable phase of their lives, regardless of who the employer is. Do not be afraid,"
Last month the tribunal was told how Mrs Hale started working for the firm in December 2014.
Senior partner at Dentons, Andrew Harris, described her work as 'brilliant'.
Mrs Hale experienced a difficult pregnancy and her mother-in-law was diagnosed with cancer.
Dentons denied sex discrimination, claiming that Mrs Hale, 37, was chosen for redundancy for being less professional than her two other colleagues in the redundancy pool.
MOST READ IN NEWS
The company was criticised for a “lack of honesty”, a “lack of credibility” and for failing to keep notes, “giving us the impression something was being hidden from us or deliberately fudged”.
Tribunal judge Martin Warren wrote: “We therefore find that whilst there was a genuine redundancy situation, the principal reason that Mrs Hale was selected and therefore dismissed was that she had been absent from work on maternity leave . . . it was convenient to dismiss her.
“We think that Ms Barnes and Mrs Rowe decided at an early stage that the easiest option was to make Mrs Hale redundant, because she was away on maternity leave and that would cause less disruption.”
A payout will be decided at a future hearing.