Bright HR Tribunal Case: maternity discrimination warning for employers

In the Bright HR Tribunal Case( Ms Sarah Lindup v Bright HR Ltd (2403495/2023),) the Employment Tribunal ruled in favour of a returning mother who was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after her maternity leave.

Bright HR, a company that offers HR software and outsourced services, was ordered to pay over £50,000 in damages, including injury to feelings.

What happened in the Bright HR tribunal case?

Sarah Lindup was a top-performing sales consultant, generating £1.3 million in sales pre-leave. During maternity leave, she was assured her role would remain unchanged. But upon returning:

• Her responsibilities were drastically reduced
• Her commission structure changed without consultation
• Managers were recorded saying her return to her old role was “ludicrous”

The Tribunal ruled this was direct maternity discrimination and that her dismissal was procedurally unfair.

Why this matters to SME employers

Even HR providers must follow the law—and when they don’t, the consequences are severe. For SME employers, it’s a wake-up call that:

• Family leave is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010
• Return-to-work plans must be clearly communicated and agreed
• Failing to do so can lead to reputational damage and costly claims

Lessons for employers

1. Don’t sideline returning parents
You cannot reduce responsibilities or alter contracts without fair consultation.

2. Comments and culture matter
Dismissive remarks—even informal—can become evidence in a tribunal.

3. Maternity protection is a legal obligation
Not just a policy box-tick. It must be embedded in culture, processes, and training.