A new mother has been awarded more than £60,000 after she was offered less hours, fewer pay and then made redundant following her maternity leave.
Monika Kaminska told an employment tribunal that she had wanted to return to work full-time after having her baby.
But when she tried to negotiate coming back with her bosses, the new mum says she was ignored and then offered a lesser deal by her boss.
The central London tribunal heard Ms Kaminska had worked as a customer service worker at Transfast Remittance - owned by Optima FX Ltd - based at its Southwark office, London, for eight years.
She fell pregnant in April 2018 and while on maternity leave the following year, says she contacted company owner Caio Marchesani about returning to work in January 2020.
A panel heard Jose Ribeiro, the managing director, had “already” said to another employee “he was not planning to take [Ms Kaminska] back”.
But the tribunal was told the new mum was then offered a role with an hourly rate of £9 and 25 hours a week instead her previous £11 wage for 50 hours a week.
In her email, she wrote: "I cannot agree to lower my salary... Also, before I went on my maternity leave I [had] officially confirmed that I was planning to return to work in January 2020."
The panel was told she received no reply from the company despite emailing twice and calling. This led to her sending a letter or grievance.
The following month she received a letter telling her she had been sacked due to the “financial situation” of the firm, the tribunal heard.
She then sent another grievance and filed an appeal against her dismissal. Ms Kaminska told the hearing she was ignored again but received a redundancy playslip.
Have you been unfairly treated by a company? Let us know: mirror.money.saving@mirror.co.uk
At the tribunal, her boss Mr Marchesani claimed he did not know who she was nor the circumstances of her employment.
Ms Kaminska sued for unfair dismissal, victimisation and discrimination and deductions from wages and was awarded £61,361.90.
The panel ruled that she was sacked “because she was on maternity leave” and was told how another employee, Agnieszka Dyrda, was also handed an identical redundancy letter after giving birth.
Ms Dyrda claims she had attempted to contact her bosses about her options for coming back to work after maternity leave multiple times.
The tribunal heard that when she “finally” spoke to company owner Mr Marchesani, he was “reprehensible and showed an utter disregard for her rights”.
Ms Dydra also claimed her emails were ignored and Mr Marchesani denied ever speaking with the new mum on the phone to the panel.
The tribunal was told she was sacked because she had wanted reduced hours. Although it had not been negotiated, Ms Dydra did accept a £13,332 redundancy payment.
Employment Judge Natasha Joffe concluded: "The treatment of Ms Dyrda showed [the company's] exceptionally poor treatment of women on maternity leave.
"[There was a] lack of evidence that any employee not on maternity leave was put at risk of redundancy or made redundant.
"We could only speculate as to the respondent's reason for not wanting to retain women who had been on maternity leave.
"In the case of both Ms Dyrda and [Ms Kaminska], it may have been simply that they had replaced both women with other satisfactory employees and it was simply more convenient to retain those employees than to accommodate new mothers."
