A mother has won more than £7,000 after being 'humiliated' by bosses who asked her when she would be returning to work while she was recovering from a hysterectomy.

Crette Berry was called, texted and sent a letter by her managers at Anglian Water in the time she was meant to be recuperating just weeks after having surgery.

The water board was accused having behaved in an 'immoral' fashion by getting in touch before her recovery period was over and was found by an employment tribunal to have 'humiliated' her. 

Miss Berry will now receive £7094.91 in damages for injury to feelings after successfully suing for disability harassment.

The hearing in Nottingham heard that Miss Berry started working for the company in May 2022 as a contact centre agent.

She did not initially tell bosses that she suffered from anxiety and depression, but did inform them she would need a hysterectomy at some point in the future.

An occupational health assessment in July 2022 found that she had been suffering with endometriosis for about 10 years and was waiting for her surgery to be arranged.

The tribunal heard that she was demonstrating early menopause symptoms as a result of the treatment she was receiving.

Over the summer, Miss Berry separated from her partner and asked to reduce her hours so she could manage childcare, a request that was initially denied but then approved.

The tribunal heard that by September she had been off sick for more than nine days, absences that led to an 'Attendance Support Meeting' with a manager.

In October she moved to half pay and went off sick at the end of November, before having her hysterectomy on December 22. She never returned physically to work.

The tribunal found that the company knew she would need three to four weeks to recover from the surgery, but was nonetheless contacted by her boss Leanne Harper on January 5 to arrange another 'attendance support meeting' for January 13.

An occupational health report on January 6, 2023, stated that Miss Berry was fit to attend meetings remotely after her surgery.

Ms Harper followed up on her letter by texting her via WhatsApp on January 10.

Miss Berry replied she was 'very poorly' and that she had a post surgery infection which was not responding to antibiotics.

Her partner at the time sent a message the day before the meeting was due to take place, informing Ms Harper that Miss Berry was not well enough to attend.

Ms Harper replied: 'Thanks for the update, with this in mind I am sorry that you are not well enough to attend tomorrow.

'I hope that you are OK and will soon be feeling better. I need to speak with you directly in relation to your absence so can you contact me as soon as you can.

'You have been cleared by occupational health to attend company meetings therefore it is important that I meet with you regarding your ongoing absence and as I mentioned previously there are also things I need to discuss.'

A message sent in response from Miss Berry's phone was critical of the company's contact with her after her surgery, the tribunal heard.

It asked: 'How can you expect Crette to know what support she will need before she's even recovered from her operation properly or [seen] the psychiatrist to address her anxiety or insomnia?'

The message added that Miss Berry felt under pressure to be well, and had torn stitches doing too much because of her anxiety.

It added: 'I will protect her mental health from becoming damaged further to make her suicidal again. The pressure you are putting on [Miss Berry] is unfair and immoral.'

Ms Harper agreed to postpone the meeting until another occupational health report had been obtained, and it was eventually held in her absence on 17 February, 2023, after she did not consent for the report to be given to the company.

She resigned on February 25, 2023, and sued for disability harassment, failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability and constructive dismissal.

Upholding her claim regarding the post-surgery contact, the tribunal said: 'Reading those messages and taking into account that [Miss Berry] had undergone surgery related to her disability, we find that each instance of contact...was unwanted conduct.'

'We conclude that although Leanne Harper...did not intend to humiliate [Miss Berry], it did have that effect on her.'

Miss Berry's complaints of a failure to make reasonable adjustments for disability and constructive dismissal were rejected.