Ingris Rosa Maya Gonzalez v St Mary’s Care Ltd — 2025

The tribunal accepted that the claimant was a practising Pentecostal Christian who had told the respondent at interview that she did not want to work weekends because she attended church on Sundays with her son. Her work pattern had been weekdays for years, including after her hours were reduced in 2020, and she told Ms Chibanda in June 2023 that she did not mind working Saturdays but not Sundays. In September 2023 the respondent signed off rotas requiring her to work Sundays, without proper consultation, and those rotas continued until December 2023.

The tribunal found that requiring the claimant to work Sundays put her at a particular disadvantage because it prevented her from attending her own Pentecostal church services in person. It accepted that attending the Catholic mass available at the respondent’s home was not a substitute, and that streaming the service was not a viable alternative because contact with the congregation was important to her faith. It also found that there were around eight Domestic Assistants, four were needed on any one day, some employees did not work Sundays for personal reasons, and there was sufficient other staff available to cover the work. On that basis, the Sunday-working requirement was not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, so the indirect religion or belief discrimination complaint succeeded.

For remedy, the tribunal placed the case in the lower Vento band because the discrimination lasted for a relatively short period and the claimant did not actually work the required Sundays. It awarded £6,000 for injury to feelings, together with £954.74 interest at 8% from 17 September 2023 to 12 September 2025, making a total of £6,954.74.

The sex-related harassment and direct sex discrimination complaints were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The tribunal found the last alleged acts were in May or June 2023, ACAS early conciliation started on 13 October 2023, and the original claim presented in December 2023 only pleaded religion or belief discrimination. The sex claims were first raised in November 2024, the claimant did not show conduct extending over a period, and the tribunal was not persuaded that it was just and equitable to extend time.