A woman forced out of her job with estate agency Purplebricks after suffering problems during her pregnancy has been awarded more than £47,000 in damages by an employment tribunal.
Murron Stewart, 27, from Elgin, Scotland, joined the company in March 2022 as a local agent and was later promoted to estate agent. She was described as a "strong performer" and was liked by bosses. Her time at the company changed after she fell pregnant.
Pregnancy kept private
Ms Stewart chose to keep her pregnancy private, having suffered previous miscarriages, but it was announced to colleagues by her line manager. She then began experiencing health issues, including morning sickness, and was moved to a virtual team.
She went on maternity leave, during which a restructuring took place. On her return, her role was changed to cover the Moray area, according to the Daily Record.
Return to work and resignation
Ms Stewart returned to work full-time in December 2024 after the birth of her son but switched to part-time hours in January 2025 due to childcare. She said she found the workload increasingly stressful and was told by bosses she was not performing to the required standard. The company also said working part-time was not meeting the requirements of her role.
After grievance meetings failed to resolve matters, Ms Stewart resigned and took Purplebricks to an employment tribunal, which ruled she had been constructively and unfairly dismissed. The tribunal found she had been discriminated against on grounds of pregnancy and maternity and/or sex.
Compensation and reaction
The company was ordered to pay £27,626.73, with an additional £18,647 for injured feelings and £1,050 as a basic award, bringing the total to £47,323.73. Ms Stewart, who gave birth to a baby girl last month, had to move back in with her parents after leaving her role.
She said: "This whole process is deeply distressing for me and my family."
Employment judge Amanda Jones said: "The respondent directly discriminated against the claimant because she had been on maternity leave and/or her sex in that she was subjected to criticism on her performance which was unreasonable and required to meet targets which were not adjusted to reflect her part time hours or the level of referrals made to her by the respondent.
"The reason for this treatment was because of the claimant's caring responsibilities, that no efforts were made to discuss the arrangements for her return to work on a similar basis as she had been working previously and a man in similar circumstances (who had returned from a period of leave) would not have been treated in the same manner."
She added: "The Tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that she loved her role and wanted to stay in it."
A spokesperson for Purplebricks said: "The Judgment relates to proceedings brought against Purplebricks Group plc, a company that was no longer operating the Purplebricks business at the relevant time and which has since been dissolved. The current Purplebricks business was not named as a Respondent to those proceedings and was therefore not a party to the Tribunal process or able to participate in the proceedings.
"The circumstances surrounding the case are being reviewed and, in view of the legal issues arising, we are unable to comment further at this stage. We are proud that more than half of our employees are parents and remain committed to fostering an inclusive and supportive working environment and to treating all colleagues with dignity and respect. We recognise the importance of supporting employees in balancing their professional and personal responsibilities and continue to promote policies and practices designed to support workplace inclusion."
