Scenario: Before she went on maternity leave, the worker agreed, in principle, to taking on a different role when she returned. The new role would, she was assured, be comparable in remuneration and status.
The worker took six months maternity leave then applied for a further three months. This was granted on condition that she agreed to move permanently into another equivalent role. The company wanted to appoint the person currently acting in her job to a permanent position.
When she returned to work, the worker found herself in a lower grade job with less responsibility and no budget. She had previously been responsible for a $1 million budget. The "developmental opportunity" she had been promised failed to materialise.
She stayed with the company, however, and eventually moved to a more satisfactory project. Sixteen months down the track, however, she resigned.
The worker claimed, successfully, that she had been discriminated against on the ground of sex under the federal Sex Discrimination Act.
Despite her win, the fact that she stayed in the job meant that she couldn't claim compensation for financial loss. The magistrate, however, awarded her $10,000 for the loss of status and the company was ordered to give her a written apology. Rispoli v Merck Sharpe & Dohme & others, Federal Magistrate's Court [2003] FMCA 160.
- Sex discrimination
- Pregnancy discrimination
- Age discrimination
- Multiple discrimination
- Race discrimination
- Homosexual discrimination
- Transgender discrimination
- Disability discrimination
- Carers discrimination
- Family Responsibilities discrimination
- Maternity Leave
- Back To Discrimination Main Page