The truck driver whose wife was pregnant

Back
Categories
HR News
Date:
19 Aug 2013

an employer was able to prove that a truck driver was dismissed for his conduct and not for his wife's pregnancy

By:
Sabine Buhl Valentiner

An employer was able to prove that a truck driver was dismissed for his conduct and not for his wife's pregnancy

An employer was able to prove that a truck driver was dismissed for his conduct and not for his wife’s ‎pregnancy.‎
 
Fathers enjoy dismissal protection under the Danish Act on Equal Treatment of Men and Women during ‎the mother’s pregnancy, and an employer who dismisses an employee during his wife’s pregnancy faces ‎a reversed burden of proof. In this case, the issue before the Danish Western High Court was whether ‎the employer had discharged this burden of proof.‎
 
A truck driver working for a transport business was dismissed and released from the duty to work the ‎notice period. No reason for the dismissal was given in the notice of dismissal. The driver believed he ‎had been dismissed because his wife was pregnant and he was therefore entitled to leave.‎
 
His employer was surprised. The driver had not said anything about the pregnancy and, in addition, they ‎had decided to dismiss him because of complaints about his conduct. The case therefore ended up in ‎court.‎
 
The High Court sided with the employer, noting initially that the burden of proof may be discharged by ‎the employer showing that the employer had no knowledge of the pregnancy – and if unable to prove ‎this point, then it will depend on an overall assessment of the merits of the case. On the evidence ‎produced, the Court took into account that the business knew about the pregnancy when the driver was ‎given notice. But the driver’s conduct was an important reason for the dismissal. Accordingly, and having ‎regard to the financial consequences of releasing him from the duty to work with the very limited ‎financial consequences it would have for the business to grant him leave due to the Childbirth Fund, the ‎Court did not believe that the business had a motive for dismissing the driver due to pregnancy or the ‎coming leave.‎

 

Norrbom Vinding notes

  • that the judgment illustrates that when an employee is dismissed during a pregnancy, the ‎decisive factor with regard to the provisions of the Danish Act on Equal Treatment of Men and ‎Women on burden of proof is whether the employer was aware of the pregnancy when the ‎decision to dismiss was made;
  • that, generally, it depends on an assessment of the merits of each individual case whether the ‎pregnancy and the coming leave were a factor in the decision to dismiss an employee; and

  • that the financial consequences for the business in connection with pregnancy and leave may be ‎taken into account in the assessment of whether the reversed burden of proof has been ‎discharged.