Colleague’s comments about pregnancy amount to harassment related to sex

The Employment Rights Act provides a further focus on sexual harassment, with sexual harassment becoming a ‘qualifying disclosure’ under whistleblowing law from the 6th April 2026, meaning protection from detriment and unfair dismissal for whistleblowers making a sexual harassment disclosure.

In addition, from October 2026, employers will need to take ‘all reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment.

The current law says ‘reasonable steps,’ so this is just firming up that duty to prevent.

Whilst the Equality Act 2010 does not cover pregnancy and maternity-related harassment, the case of Ms A Hope v Ola Electric UK Private Ltd shows how such claims can be brought as sexual harassment.

Hope was a Lead Human Factors Designer at Ola Electric who raised claims of discrimination, unfair dismissal, and harassment related to sex following comments made by male colleagues during Hope’s pregnancy.

After nearly a year with Ola Electric, Hope announced to her employer and colleagues that she was pregnant.

A month later, Hope had been expressing concerns to a male colleague (Edmund Willis) that her baby bump was not growing.

In reply, he joked that “the boob fairy hasn’t been either”, which left Hope feeling insulted and objectified.

A few months later, another male employee (David Lippett) posted on the Ola Electric group chat, saying:

“Women say that giving birth is way more painful than a bloke getting kicked in the bollocks. Here is proof that they are wrong. A year or so after giving birth, a woman will often say, ‘It’d be nice to have another baby. You never hear a bloke say ‘I wouldn’t mind another kick in the bollocks’. Case closed.”

David followed up the message by saying that the comment made him think of Hope.

Several employees liked the message, including Hope’s line manager (David Rouse).

Hope replied with the following:

“Although suggesting child birth isn’t as bad may well be interpreted as indeed asking for a kick in the bollocks…”

Lippett told the Tribunal that he had a good relationship with Hope and was only trying to be funny.

However, considering Hope’s anxiety about her pregnancy, the judge referred to this message as “crude” and acknowledged none of this would have likely seemed very funny to Hope.

Hope began her maternity leave in August 2023, before being made redundant in January 2024 after the project she was working on had closed, and Hope then raised claims to the Tribunal.

Although the claims of discrimination and unfair dismissal were unsuccessful, the Tribunal agreed that Hope had been subject to harassment related to sex based on the comments made by Willis and Lippett, and the fact that Hope’s line manager had also agreed with Lippett’s comment.

This case emphasises the position of the Tribunals in relation to harassment claims.

Ultimately, it is not what the perpetrator intended, but the impact that it has on the victim that the Tribunal will take into account.

If you need to review workplace conduct, manager guidance, or complaint handling following this case, contact Solutions for HR for support with policy updates, documentation, and training.