A mum won more than £7,000 after being “humiliated” by her bosses who asked her when she would return to work while recovering from a hysterectomy.
Crette Berry received a call, text and letter from her managers at Anglian Water just as she was due to recover, just weeks after surgery.
The water board was accused of having behaved “immorally” by making contact before her recovery period had ended and was found to have “humiliated” her by an employment tribunal.
Miss Berry will now receive £7,094.91 in damages for injury to feelings after successfully suing for disability harassment.
The hearing in Nottingham emerged that Miss Berry began working for the company in May 2022 as a contact center agent.
She did not initially tell her bosses that she suffered from anxiety and depression, but she did inform them that she would need a hysterectomy at some point in the future.
An occupational health assessment carried out in July 2022 found that she had suffered from endometriosis for around 10 years and was waiting for her surgery to be organised.
The court heard she was demonstrating symptoms of early menopause as a result of the treatment she was receiving.
Crette Berry was ‘humiliated’ by bosses who repeatedly contacted her by phone and email while recovering from hysterectomy (file photo)
Over the summer, Miss Berry separated from her partner and asked to reduce her hours so she could take care of the children, a request that was initially denied but later approved.
The court heard that in September he had been on sick leave for more than nine days, absences which led to an “Attendance Support Meeting” with a manager.
She went on to receive half pay in October and became ill at the end of November, before having a hysterectomy on December 22. He never physically returned to work.
The court found that the company knew she would need three to four weeks to recover from the surgery, but her boss Leanne Harper still contacted her on January 5 to arrange another “care support meeting.” for January 13.
An occupational health report dated January 6, 2023 indicated that Miss Berry was able to attend meetings remotely following her surgery.
Ms Harper followed up on his letter by sending him a text message via WhatsApp on January 10.
Miss Berry replied that she was “very unwell” and had a post-operative infection which did not respond to antibiotics.
Her partner at the time sent a message the day before the meeting, informing Ms Harper that Ms Berry was not well enough to attend.
Mrs Harper replied: “Thank you for the update. With this in mind, I am sorry you are not well enough to attend tomorrow.”
‘I hope you are well and that you feel better soon. I need to speak to you directly regarding your absence, so please contact me as soon as possible.
“You have been cleared by occupational health to attend company meetings, therefore it is important that I meet with you in relation to your continued absence and, as I mentioned previously, there are also things I need to discuss.”
A message sent in response from Miss Berry’s phone criticized the company’s contact with her after her surgery, the court heard.
He asked: “How can you expect Crette to know what support she will need even before she properly recovers from her operation or (see) a psychiatrist to treat her anxiety or insomnia?”
The message added that Miss Berry felt pressure to be well and that her stitches had broken due to her anxiety.
He added: “I will protect her mental health from being damaged further and making her suicidal again.” “The pressure you are putting (on Ms. Berry) is unfair and immoral.”
Ms Harper agreed to postpone the meeting until another occupational health report was obtained, and it was eventually held in her absence on February 17, 2023, after she did not consent to the report being provided to the company.
A Nottingham employment tribunal (pictured) found Miss Crette was subject to ‘unwelcome conduct’ and awarded her £7,094.91 in damages for injury to her feelings.
He resigned on February 25, 2023 and filed suit for disability harassment, failure to make reasonable disability accommodations, and constructive discharge.
Upholding her claim about post-surgery contact, the court said: “On reading those messages and taking into account that (Miss Berry) had undergone surgery related to her disability, we find that each instance of contact… “It was unwanted behavior.”
“We conclude that although Leanne Harper…did not intend to humiliate (Miss Berry), it did have that effect on her.”
Miss Berry’s complaints for failure to make reasonable disability adjustments and for constructive dismissal were rejected.