The applicant alleged discrimination in employment on the basis of sex (pregnancy) contrary to the Human Rights Code, claiming her employment was terminated when she went on maternity leave.
Although the respondent did not actually terminate her employment or benefits, the adjudicator found that the respondent's communications led the applicant to reasonably believe her contract had ended.
This misunderstanding caused the applicant to believe she had no job to return to and no benefit coverage, resulting in her paying out-of-pocket for a semi-private hospital room.
The Tribunal held that leading the applicant to believe she was terminated constituted adverse treatment because of pregnancy.
The respondent was ordered to pay $460 for the hospital bill and $1,000 for injury to dignity, feelings, and self-respect.
