I work as an employment paralegal at Magara Law, and pregnancy discrimination is one of those issues that can look obvious in hindsight but feel much harder to name while it is happening.
It rarely starts with a formal decision. More often, it starts with a shift in tone, a change in opportunity, or a comment that reveals an assumption nobody has said out loud before.
A recent BBC Wales report about an employment tribunal decision brought that into sharp focus. The case (Ms J Morgan vs Panelex Wood Agency Limited and Frederick Geriant Hawkes) involved a sales manager who, while several months pregnant, offered to help present to clients.
The tribunal accepted that she was told words to the effect that “nobody wants to see a pregnant person”. It found that the comment amounted to unfavourable treatment linked to pregnancy, although the particular discrimination complaint was dismissed because it had been brought out of time.
A related victimisation complaint succeeded after later correspondence about a company car, following a request for holiday pay accrued during maternity leave.
The legal detail matters, but so does the broader question: in 2026, have workplace attitudes towards pregnancy really moved on?
Employers would say attitudes towards pregnancy at work have improved
On paper, many employers would say yes. Policies are better, flexible working is more widely discussed, pregnancy and maternity are clearly protected under the Equality Act 2010, and guidance from Acas explains that unfavourable treatment because someone is pregnant, on maternity leave, entitled to maternity leave, or experiencing pregnancy-related illness can amount to discrimination.
Research by campaigns like Pregnant Then Screwed indicates that nearly half (49.5%) to three quarters of mothers report facing negative or discriminatory experiences at work.
But lived experience often tells a more complicated story. We may have moved away from some of the most overt forms of hostility, yet the underlying assumptions can still be there.
Pregnancy can still be treated as a professional inconvenience. A capable employee can suddenly become someone to be managed around, protected from visibility, or quietly removed from the very work that would otherwise help her progress.
25 years ago, I’m old enough to remember a similar case – an HR Director was asked in her interview whether she intended to have children; she replied that she had cream sofas which seemed to satisfy the interviewer, the CEO.
A few weeks later, that same CEO announced in an open senior management meeting that “all women who work here should be sterilised”. With all the changes in employment legislation over those 25 years, is it possible that these two cases are really 25 years apart?
Visibility is not a favour
The comment reported in the BBC story matters because it’s about visibility. Client-facing work, presentations, pitches, networking, travel, leadership moments and profile-building assignments are not extras. In many roles, they are the work that drives promotion, confidence, reputation, and pay progression.
When a pregnant employee is kept away from those opportunities, even with supposedly good intentions, the effect can be career-limiting.
It might be framed as kindness: “We thought you would prefer not to present.” “The client might find it distracting.” “This trip is probably too much for you.” “Let’s review things after maternity leave.”
But if similar assumptions would not be made for someone who was not pregnant, is it safe to make them to a pregnant employee?
A helpful test is this: are we responding to a real, evidenced health and safety issue, or are we reacting to discomfort about pregnancy itself?
There is a significant difference between making practical adjustments so someone can continue doing meaningful work and removing meaningful work because pregnancy makes other people feel awkward.
The subtle shifts matter
Pregnancy discrimination is not always dramatic. Sometimes it is the cumulative effect of small changes: fewer informal check-ins, less candid feedback, being left out of meetings, no longer being copied into client updates, or having work filtered through someone else “for ease”. These changes can be difficult to prove, but they are often easy to feel.
For the employee, the message can become clear: you may still have a job, but you are no longer seen as part of the future. That feeling is damaging. It can undermine trust long before any formal dispute emerges. It can also make the prospect of returning from maternity leave feel uncertain, risky or even impossible.
This is why managers need to treat communication as part of the legal and cultural framework, not as an optional soft skill. A short, structured conversation after pregnancy is disclosed can prevent months of anxiety.
What work will continue? What support is needed? What adjustments are genuinely required? How will performance be assessed? What opportunities should remain available? What will handover and return look like?
Good management is not about pretending pregnancy changes nothing. It is about making sure the changes are discussed openly, handled lawfully and approached with respect.
Process cannot replace culture
Employment law cases often hinge on process: dates, emails, grievances, limitation periods, pleaded claims and evidence. Those things matter. In tribunal litigation, they can be decisive.
The Ms J Morgan vs Panelex Wood Agency Limited and Frederick Geriant Hawkes case is a reminder that a claim may be deemed well-founded in substance but still fail if it is brought outside the relevant time limit.
But employers should be cautious about taking comfort from technical outcomes. If an employee has experienced unfavourable treatment linked to pregnancy, the fact that a particular claim is out of time does not mean the workplace culture is healthy. A business that “wins” on limitation may still have lost trust, talent and credibility.
For employees, the process point is equally important. Pregnancy, birth, recovery, and caring responsibilities are all-consuming. It is understandable that someone may try to resolve matters informally before seeking advice.
However, time limits in employment claims can be short. Keeping notes, confirming key points in writing and seeking early advice can make a real difference.
Victimisation is a common flashpoint
Another issue that frequently appears in these disputes is victimisation: adverse treatment because someone has raised, or tried to raise, concerns about their rights.
In practice, the flashpoint is often not the original pregnancy announcement, but what happens later, when the employee asks about holiday accrual, pay, equipment, company property, return arrangements or flexible working.
These conversations can become unnecessarily personalised. A request for a calculation becomes a challenge to authority. An email about accrued holiday becomes a sharp exchange about loyalty. A disagreement about a company car becomes a wider dispute about attitude. Once tone escalates, confidence collapses quickly.
Employers can reduce risk by keeping entitlement discussions neutral, factual, and well documented. If relationships have become strained, it may be sensible for HR or another manager to handle those conversations. Clear calculations, timelines and calm language are far more effective than defensive or threatening correspondence.
What good looks like
So, what should employers do differently? First, define the role before making assumptions about the person. If client presentations are part of the job, begin with the question: “How can we support you to keep doing this safely and effectively?” not “Should you still be seen doing this?”
Adjust travel, timing, seating, breaks or format where needed, but do not remove visibility without a proper reason.
Second, agree a simple pregnancy and maternity plan. This does not need to be bureaucratic. It should cover work allocation, health and safety considerations, appointments, handover, keeping-in-touch arrangements, holiday, likely return dates, and reintegration. The plan should be reviewed as circumstances change.
Third, keep development alive. Training, mentoring, stretch work and profile-building opportunities should not stop automatically because someone is pregnant or approaching maternity leave.
Ask what the employee wants to remain involved in and what support would help. “We will pick this up when you return” should not become a polite way of parking someone’s progression indefinitely.
Fourth, prepare properly for return. Some of the hardest moments arise after maternity leave, when roles have shifted, clients have moved on, systems have changed and confidence may have been knocked.
A good return-to-work plan should include re-onboarding, updated client briefings, clarity on responsibilities, and timely consideration of any flexible working request.
Fifth, train line managers properly. The most significant legal risk often arises in ordinary management conversations: allocating work, responding to absence, discussing performance, agreeing flexibility, and handling return from leave.
Generic equality training is unlikely to be enough. Managers need practical scenarios, clear escalation routes and confidence to ask respectful questions rather than make assumptions.
Sixth, measure outcomes. If an organisation is serious about retaining talent, it should look at promotion, pay progression, performance ratings, and attrition for employees who have taken maternity leave. If the data shows a dip, the answer is not to explain it away. The answer is to examine the system and fix what is not working.
For employees: protect your position early
For employees, my practical advice is to document calmly and early. Keep a contemporaneous note of key conversations. Confirm important points by email. If opportunities are being removed “for your own good”, say whether you wish to continue with them and suggest practical support that would make that possible.
If something feels wrong, seek advice sooner rather than later. You do not need to be committed to litigation before asking where you stand. Early advice can help preserve options, clarify time limits and sometimes resolve issues before positions harden.
It is also worth remembering that professional tone matters, even when others fall short. A clear, measured email will often serve you better than a reactive one. That is not about minimising what happened; it is about protecting your credibility and creating a record that accurately reflects your concerns.
The real test
The real test of progress is not whether an employer has a policy on the intranet. It is what happens in the meeting after someone says they are pregnant.
Does the manager ask practical, respectful questions? Are opportunities kept open? Is the employee trusted to know her own capacity? Are adjustments treated as ordinary management rather than inconvenience? Is the return from maternity leave planned with the same care as any other important business transition?
We should also be honest that clients and colleagues sometimes react awkwardly to pregnancy. They may comment on appearance, energy or priorities in ways they would not otherwise.
The answer is not to hide pregnant employees from view. The answer is leadership. Set the standard. Make it clear that pregnancy is a normal part of working life and that professionalism does not disappear because someone is expecting a child.
So, have workplace attitudes to pregnancy moved on? In some ways, yes. The legal framework is clearer, many employers are more aware of their obligations, and conversations about flexibility and inclusion are far more common than they once were.
But cases like this remind us that progress is uneven. One careless sentence can reveal old assumptions. One exclusion from client-facing work can alter a career path. One hostile letter can turn a difficult situation into a legal claim.
My takeaway is simple: the law sets the floor, not the ceiling. Compliance matters, but culture is built in everyday management decisions. Ask, do not assume. Support, do not sideline. Plan,do not react. Communicate with care.
If we want to say that attitudes have truly moved on, pregnancy cannot be treated as a reason to reduce visibility, momentum, or ambition. It should be treated as a normal phase of working life: planned for properly, supported respectfully, and managed without assumption.
I would be interested to hear from others: what practical steps have you seen work well in keeping pregnant colleagues visible, supported and progressing? And where do you think workplaces still have further to go?
Concerned about pregnancy or maternity treatment at work?
Magara Law advises both employees and employers on pregnancy and maternity discrimination, redundancy, flexible working, reasonable adjustments, grievances, workplace investigations and Employment Tribunal claims.
For employers, early advice can help you make fair, lawful decisions before a management issue develops into a formal dispute.
For employees, we can help you understand whether the treatment you are experiencing may cross the line into unlawful discrimination and what steps you can take to protect your position.
If pregnancy or maternity is affecting a workplace decision, get the legal position clear before the situation becomes harder to resolve.
Call 01869 325 883, email hello@magaralaw.co.uk or book your consultation direct. Once you have scheduled your consultation, subscribe to our YouTube channel and follow us on social media for all the latest employment law updates and information you need.