Metal industry worker discriminates for pregnancy and parenting

The advocate of the principle of equality found the discrimination of the worker due to pregnancy, parenting and health. The poorer treatment compared to other employees was manifested by the fact that the company exempted it from a general increase in salaries by seven percent, and was deprived of it in the annual prize for business performance. Advocate Miha Lobnik in the process of determining discrimination that this management of the company was unjustified and therefore a violation of anti -discrimination legislation.

Due to alleged discriminatory treatment, employed companies from the metal industry were approached by Lobnik. She stated that it was poorly treated in the company because of its absence due to child care, health problems in pregnancy and maternity and parental leave. She said that everyone received a notification of a seven -percent salary in the company, which was then not realized for it. She received only a 0.53 % raise. She also claimed that the company had been treating her worse in the Business performance Award for 2022, as she paid her a lower amount than she should have.

The company rejected the allegations of discrimination in the proceedings, but the worker was more successful in his proof. The advocate of the principle of equality could not take into account the defense of the company that the employee had received poorer hearings compared to others because of her poor work. Namely, the company assessed its probationary work as positive, with it, with the second extension of the fixed -term contract, concluded a new contract with a higher salary and then employed it indefinitely.

Regarding the statements that the worker did not achieve the results of the work, she did not submit any emails or other notes that would indicate that she was actually doing poorly. The employee, however, provided an e -mail, which follows that frequent and longer absences for the management of the company were also problematic when they were justified and the result of personal circumstances that employees have no influence.

Advocate Miha Lobnik, therefore, found a discriminatory treatment of the worker in the increase in salaries to all employees when the worker received a significantly lower increase than other employees. During the proceedings, the company indicated the rest of this award for the year 2022 on the basis of the case law of the Supreme Court regarding the payment of the Business performance Award. Therefore, the advocate stopped the procedure in this part of the proceedings.

The worker also criticized the company another worse hearing for her personal circumstances, including the abolition of her post with a consequence termination of the employment contract. The advocate of the principle of equality, on the basis of the submitted evidence, could not confirm the causal association between these actions of the company and the personal circumstances of the worker, and therefore did not identify the discriminatory hearing in these allegations.