Nanny is awarded more than £38,000

A nanny who was sacked after complaining her employer’s partner refused to quarantine following a trip to France has been awarded more than £38,000.  

An employment tribunal heard how Janine O’Harris had concerns about Covid exposure because she suffers from asthma and her partner has diabetes.

The nanny raised this with her employer Domitille Rambaud after her partner Nicolas Granatino claimed he didn’t need to self-isolate on his return to the UK because he ‘had antibodies.’

After returning from abroad in June 2020, the employment tribunal accepted that he should have quarantined for 14 days. 

Instead, he continued to attend work and ‘objected to polite questioning’ about his lack of self-isolation, it was claimed.

Ms O’Harris, who had cared for her employer’s two children for two years, was paid notice and asked to leave a day after she raised her concerns.  

Her employer told her that Mr Granatino would look after the children himself, but then hired another nanny.

Janine O'Harris had concerns about Covid exposure because she suffers from asthma and her partner has diabetes, placing them both at higher risk from the virus. Pictured left: Her employer, Domitille Rambaud

Janine O'Harris had concerns about Covid exposure because she suffers from asthma and her partner has diabetes, placing them both at higher risk from the virus. Pictured left: Her employer, Domitille Rambaud

Janine O’Harris had concerns about Covid exposure because she suffers from asthma and her partner has diabetes, placing them both at higher risk from the virus. Pictured left: Her employer, Domitille Rambaud

Speaking today, Ms O’Harris alleged her concerns about the virus were brushed aside after Ms Rambaud claimed her partner had ‘antibodies.’  

‘But obviously this all happened last year when nobody knew whether people had the antibodies or not,’ she claimed.

‘I told them I think if you look at the health and safety regulations you’ll find you have to quarantine.

‘The next morning I was walking to work and passed him on the street, not a care in the world for the general public.’

Ms O’Harris also alleged that Mr Granatino had Covid in March and they ‘didn’t tell me about it for something like 10 days.’  

‘I was working in the flat so of course I came into contact with him because it’s close proximity, although fortunately I didn’t get it,’ Ms O’Harris said.

‘He was flying home from Paris that night and the Government had just announced that people coming from France had to quarantine.

‘I brought it up with Domitille again that morning and said “Look I’ve seen the news he should be quarantining”.

‘But she must have told him because he came back at lunch time and said you are dismissed you can leave now.’  

Sitting in London, employment judge Tim Russell said Ms O’Harris claimed she had been ‘unfairly dismissed’ by her employers on June 10, 2020. 

‘The Respondent’s partner, Mr Granatino, refused to self-isolate when returning from France in June 2020 against government guidelines at the time,’ he said.

‘He gave no substantive reasons beyond stating that he was protected by antibodies. 

The nanny raised this with Ms Rambaud after her partner Nicolas Granatino (above) said he didn't need to self-isolate on his return to the UK because he 'had antibodies'

The nanny raised this with Ms Rambaud after her partner Nicolas Granatino (above) said he didn't need to self-isolate on his return to the UK because he 'had antibodies'

The nanny raised this with Ms Rambaud after her partner Nicolas Granatino (above) said he didn’t need to self-isolate on his return to the UK because he ‘had antibodies’

Ms O'Harris also claimed that Mr Granatino had Covid in March and they 'didn't tell me about it for something like 10 days.' Pictured: Central London Employment Tribunal

Ms O'Harris also claimed that Mr Granatino had Covid in March and they 'didn't tell me about it for something like 10 days.' Pictured: Central London Employment Tribunal

 Ms O’Harris also claimed that Mr Granatino had Covid in March and they ‘didn’t tell me about it for something like 10 days.’ Pictured: Central London Employment Tribunal

‘He went to work as normal and objected to polite questioning by the Claimant as to his refusal to adhere to the rules.

‘He may have believed he had had Covid-19 and or had some other reasons to ignore the Government health guidelines but the Claimant was concerned as to her own health as an asthma sufferer and that of her own partner who has diabetes as an underlying condition as well as the Claimant’s mother whom she cared for.

‘She was genuinely and legitimately worried about her and her family’s health and safety as a consequence of the actions of the Respondent and her partner.

‘But having raised these concerns directly with her employer household she was, the very next day, dismissed.

‘There was no fair dismissal procedure, no conduct or capability issues were raised, formally or informally and no disciplinary hearing took place.

‘There was a complete absence of process. In this case the complete lack of any procedure and the timing of the dismissal and false reason simply confirms the real reason for the dismissal as well as the unfairness of it.

‘The Claimant was dismissed because she made her health and safety complaint.

‘But it was a concern she was quite entitled to have, a complaint that she was perfectly entitled to make and there is no suggestion that she made it in other than a thoughtful and reasonable way.’

Ms Rambaud claimed the dismissal was nothing to do with the nanny’s discussion about the quarantine period.

Instead, she claimed she had concluded that Ms O’Harris did not like her husband being at home observing her and that her relationship with the children was not as positive as it should be.

She also claimed that Ms O’Harris was inflexible in her work. 

Ms O’Harris argued that following her dismissal due to the pandemic it was difficult to find alternative employment and she had been left without a reference.

She had worked for them for just over two years but had been with another family for eight years before that.

Ms O’Harris has signed on with three agencies since being sacked and the tribunal lauded the fact she had not claimed benefit but was living on savings and her partner whilst she looked for work.

Making the award, Employment Judge Russell added: ‘Finally, although the vaccine roll out has begun it is legitimate to find that it may be another six months before she can get viable employment once more.

‘That this situation arises to the detriment of the Respondent is in a large part due to the unfairness of the dismissal in the first place.

‘In that the Respondent then inherits the problem job market on remedy just as the Claimant has faced it in practice. 

‘No doubt exacerbated by the absence of a guaranteed favourable reference.’

They awarded her her annual salary of just over £35,000 plus a compensatory award totalling £38,292.65. 

Link hienalouca.com

Advertising:

Tips to Find Low Priced Luxury Holiday Package Deals Fast

For most families, it has already been a common practice to spend the Holiday season in a foreign location. This is caused by the aviation market changes which have given a lot of benefits for people who travel a lot. Airfares going to different tourist destinations are becoming more inexpensive. What does this mean? If there is a perfect time to purchase luxury holiday package deals, now it the right time! Based on the market trend nowadays, you can save both money and time when you go for a luxury holiday. There are countless offers that combine travel and accommodation in one package which is a lot cheaper than getting separate deals. Aside from that, it is also risky to individually book the services that you need for the vacation. You might end up missing out on some important details of the trip. Unlike when you take advantage of luxury holiday package deals, you can be sure that everything is organized meticulously and according to what you really need. Nonetheless, you would still need to carefully select the package that would fit your needs. Review the following tips in getting packages that are reasonably priced. · Normally, luxury tour packages include accommodation, flight travel and transportation to individual tourist destinations. It would be best to choose the complete package so you won’t have to worry about other vacation elements. In addition to that, these are the packages that have the biggest discounts. · You can get big mark down prices, if you will purchase more packages. It is not a bad idea to share the wonderful moment with your loved ones. By doing so, you would not only enjoy, you will also save more money. You can even use your savings for other activities on your vacation. · It would be best to know how much you are willing to pay for the luxury tour packages. You can already work around your budget. You have to stick to your budget. If not, you might end up spending a lot and you will be left with less money for your vacation. · Prices may vary depending on the destination of the tour. You can do a research about places that are attractive yet inexpensive. There are thousands of destinations and you just have to choose wisely. · There are packages that include recreational activities. This means that you are paying for all the activities when you purchase these packages. The right thing to do is to make sure that the activities that are included would be the ones that you really enjoy. There is no sense in paying for activities that will not really make your vacation memorable. If you are going with friends, you should also consider their preferences so that you can be sure that everyone will enjoy the trip. There are other ways on how you can be sure that you are getting the best deal for your luxury holiday vacation. No matter how you choose to do it, you have to get adequate information about the packages. This will help you determine whether it is worth the price.

(Total views: 71 Time, 1 visits per day)

Leave a Reply