21-05-2025
Labour Court rules in favour of pregnant employee in discrimination case against paint company
The Labour Court has determined that a paint company, which placed a pregnant worker on early pregnancy leave as she could no longer work among the paint chemicals, and it had no other work for her, discriminated against her.
Image: File
A paint company, which was found to have discriminated against a pregnant employee who worked for it by placing her on unpaid maternity leave months before she was due to go on leave, was ordered to pay her 11 months' back pay.
Daisy Moleme turned to the Durban Labour Court, where she sued her now former employer under the Employment Equity Act and the non-compliance with the Basic Conditions of Employment Act.
Moleme was employed by Induradec Coatings as a chemist, and her duties included aspects of both research relating to, as well as the development of products for the employer, a chemical coating company.
Having fallen pregnant some 12 weeks earlier, Moleme notified her employer of her pregnancy in March 2023. She was concerned about continuing to work in the laboratory, which would expose her to certain chemicals.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Ad Loading
She requested to be moved out of that environment, and she was moved to another office, but for two months, she was assigned no duties. This was after her manager had agreed that she would be provided with a computer to enable her to carry out such limited functions as she was able to while she was away from the laboratory.
The company, meanwhile, tried to obtain professional guidance as to how to handle Moleme's situation, as the paint company uses a variety of raw materials in the chemical makeup of its products, and it feared that this could affect the unborn baby.
All safety data sheets were available, but the literature does not specify pregnant persons; it said.
In May 2023, the company told Moleme that she was placed on early maternity leave without pay, as it was unable to use her. She was also told by her manager that the company was 'not getting value for money' at that stage, as she had fallen pregnant.
The court acknowledged that the company did obtain expert opinions on how to handle Moleme's situation. It was advised to accommodate her elsewhere in the company, but it did not do so.
It also accepted that by placing her on unpaid maternity leave, the decision was not made with deliberate intent to discriminate against her on account of her pregnancy.
But, the court said, the failure to utilise her services outside of the laboratory evinced complete indifference not only to its legal obligations but also to the negative consequences which would inevitably and foreseeably befall the applicant by being deprived of the ability to earn her salary.
'It can further not be doubted that whilst on maternity leave, whether paid or not, pregnant employees by virtue of their absence from the workplace in certain instances invariably lose out on advantages of being at the workplace, such as bonuses, promotions, and career development in the form of training and development offered to other employees,' the court stated.
It concluded that pregnant women continue to worry about the prospects of their continued employment once they disclose their pregnancy or even after childbirth.
In the case of the applicant, the invariable consequences of pregnancy were exacerbated by how the company treated her, the court stated.
