Six-figure sum for banker who had bonus cut when she was pregnant

A CITY banker whose bonus was cut by 80 per cent when she told her bosses she was pregnant received a six-figure sum yesterday in settlement of her sex discrimination claim.

An employment tribunal said it had "no hesitation" in concluding that the treatment of Arianna McGregor-Mezzotero, 37, by the French bank BNP Paribas was "exceedingly poor" after finding it guilty of sex discrimination in June last year.

A legal order prevents the terms of the settlement being made public, but the Italian-born banker was hoping to receive 500,000 and yesterday her lawyer David Whincup said she was "happy with the settlement".

BNP Paribas spokeswoman Ruth Lavelle refused to confirm if the bank had paid out such a sum.

Mrs McGregor-Mezzotero claimed she was treated in a "humiliating and offensive" way by managers at the bank and had her promised bonus for 2001 cut by 175,000 to 31,000. On average her male colleagues received a bonus of 287,500 - nine times more than her.

Upholding her claim over bonuses for 2000, 2001 and 2002, the tribunal panel agreed: "It is apparent that the tribunal could come to a finding that there has been unlawful discrimination simply by looking at the bonuses paid to [her colleagues] Michael Blanning, Lucas Gnehm and Gerald Ruecker, each of which were more than 10 times the bonus paid to the applicant."

And the tribunal observed: "It is apparent that each of the comparators is male and received a bonus, whereas the applicant did not. Further, they of course had not been on maternity leave."

The French bank had appealed against the tribunal decision but reached an out-of-court settlement yesterday.

The married mother of two, who was unavailable for comment, left her job in December and is now taking a break.

BNP Paribas spokeswoman, Ms Lavelle added: "Arianna Mezzotero and BNP Paribas are pleased to announce that they have settled all of their differences. They will make no further comment."

Mrs McGregor-Mezzotero, of Chingford, east London, claimed she was shifted to a "dud" job in a different division and given poor clients when she returned from maternity leave the first time in May 2000.

Although the tribunal rejected that part of her claim because it was lodged too late, it found it contained important background to other complaints.

When she returned from her second maternity leave in November 2002 her post in the bank’s Northern Europe Financial Institutions Group had been turned into a job share and the bank tried to "freeze" her out in a bid to get her to resign.

She told the tribunal: "It is my belief that it was the bank’s intention to make my position on my return from maternity leave untenable."

The tribunal said: "We have no doubt that on her return to work the applicant was treated differently from how she had been treated before she went on maternity leave."

Mrs McGregor-Mezzotero, who has worked in the banking sector for over 12 years, was successful in her claim for sexual discrimination, saying she was denied equal pay - charges which BNP Paribas denied.

Despite closing successful deals, she had her bonus reduced. She told the tribunal: "The 175,000 bonus I had been on in mid 2001 (before it was known I was pregnant) was eventually reduced by over 80 per cent after the bank’s discovery I was pregnant."

After lodging grievances about her treatment she spent five months on leave.

Speaking after her victory last year, Mr Whincup said: "Where it really mattered she won. It’s been such a long slog that when I initially told her the result there was silence because she was so overwhelmed. But I think she is delighted - and rightly so, because she’s been made to fight a long and bitter battle over things that weren’t really defensible.

"It’s a repeated lesson to the City - if you are going to make bonus decisions you have to justify them."