Beauty Technician Wins £32,000 Compensation After Menopause-Related Workplace Dispute

A 48-year-old beauty and aesthetics technician has been awarded more than £32,000 following an employment tribunal case involving menopause symptoms, workplace adjustments and her dismissal from a Hampshire clinic.

Chantelle Van Vliet, an experienced beauty therapist, argued that her employer failed to properly respond to the difficulties she was experiencing during menopause. The tribunal ultimately found in her favour on several claims, including disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments, wrongful dismissal, unpaid wages and victimisation.

Significantly, more than £16,000 of the award was attributed to what is legally described as "injury to feelings", reflecting the emotional impact the dismissal had on her.

Menopause Symptoms Affected Her Working Life

According to the tribunal findings reported in August 2026, Van Vliet had worked as a Senior Aesthetic Therapist for Footlaffs Limited in Petersfield, Hampshire, since June 2022.

She had more than two decades of experience in the beauty and aesthetics industry and had previously worked at prestigious spas. However, from 2022 onwards, she experienced a range of symptoms that became increasingly difficult to manage.

These reportedly included migraines, hot flushes and recurrent urinary tract infections. By 2023 and early 2024, the symptoms had become more severe.

She also experienced fatigue, confusion and what she described as "brain fog", particularly when working later shifts.

In April 2024, Van Vliet discussed her menopause symptoms with her employer and reportedly spoke about hormone replacement therapy. The following month, she took time away from work because she was struggling to cope with the severity of her symptoms.

She subsequently requested flexible working arrangements.

Flexible Working Request Was Central to the Case

Van Vliet asked to change her working arrangements to achieve a better balance between her health, employment and family responsibilities.

Her request included a proposed three-month trial period, allowing her employer to assess whether the amended working pattern could work for the business.

However, according to the tribunal findings, the request was not properly followed up.

Shortly afterwards, Van Vliet was removed from the work rota for a shift, with the explanation that she had no clients booked. The tribunal heard that she did in fact have clients scheduled.

The situation escalated when staff were subsequently dismissed as part of a redundancy process.

However, the tribunal heard that many of the dismissed employees were offered new contracts through a new business operated by the same individuals.

Van Vliet was reportedly the only aesthetic therapist who was not rehired.

Tribunal Found Disability Discrimination

The employment tribunal considered whether Van Vliet had been treated differently because of circumstances connected to her health and whether her request for flexible working should have been treated as a request for a reasonable adjustment.

Employment Judge Jonathan Burns concluded that the clinic's management had knowledge, or at least constructive knowledge, of her disability.

The tribunal found that her condition placed her at a substantial disadvantage compared with employees who were not affected by the same condition.

Importantly, the judge considered her flexible working request to be, in substance, a request for a reasonable adjustment.

The tribunal concluded that allowing her to alter her shifts would have been a reasonable step. Her proposal was described as modest and sensible, particularly because she had suggested testing the arrangement over three months.

The tribunal also found that the employer had not demonstrated a lawful, non-discriminatory explanation for selecting Van Vliet rather than the other aesthetic therapists for exclusion from the new business.

£32,237 Compensation Awarded

The tribunal awarded Van Vliet a total of £32,237.

The compensation included several separate elements.

She was awarded £3,228 in unpaid wages and a further £510 for notice pay. A further £12,077 was awarded for loss of salary.

The largest individual component related to injury to feelings.

Van Vliet was awarded £16,422 after the tribunal found that the dismissal had a serious emotional impact on her. The judgment referred to consequences including loss of confidence, distress, difficulties within family life and problems with everyday functioning.

Together, these awards brought the total compensation to more than £32,000.

The tribunal upheld claims relating to disability discrimination, wrongful dismissal, unlawful deduction of wages, failure to make reasonable adjustments and victimisation.

However, not every claim succeeded. Claims of automatic unfair dismissal and direct discrimination were dismissed.

Why This Case Matters for Menopause in the Workplace

The case highlights the growing importance of understanding menopause in employment.

Menopause can affect people in very different ways. While some experience relatively mild symptoms, others can face symptoms that interfere significantly with concentration, sleep, energy levels, mood and their ability to work particular hours.

For employers, the key issue is not simply whether someone is experiencing menopause. It is whether their symptoms create a disadvantage at work and whether appropriate steps can be taken to support them.

Possible workplace adjustments can include changes to working hours, rest breaks, temperature control, access to appropriate facilities, alterations to duties or greater flexibility around shifts, depending on the individual's circumstances and the requirements of the role.

The tribunal's findings in this case underline why employers should take health-related workplace requests seriously and consider whether they may amount to a request for reasonable adjustments.

Employee Rights and Employer Responsibilities

The legal position surrounding menopause and disability can be complex.

Menopause itself is not automatically a disability under UK equality law. However, severe symptoms may amount to a disability if they have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on a person's ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.

Where that threshold is met, an employer may have legal duties under the Equality Act 2010, including the duty to consider reasonable adjustments.

This means employers should avoid making assumptions about an employee's capabilities simply because they are experiencing menopause symptoms.

Instead, employers should listen to the employee, understand the difficulties being experienced and consider whether practical changes could remove or reduce any disadvantage.

Compensation May Not Be the End of the Story

Although the tribunal awarded Van Vliet £32,237, receiving the money may prove more complicated.

According to the reported case, the new company involved in the dispute, Always Time To Be Me Ltd, was in voluntary liquidation. This reportedly left uncertainty over when, or whether, the compensation would be paid.

Van Vliet has since become self-employed and operates her own beauty therapy business.

Speaking after the judgment, she said she hoped the case would draw attention to how employees experiencing menopause symptoms can be treated at work.

Her case also sends a wider message to employers: workplace health concerns should not be ignored, particularly when an employee has made a specific request for a practical adjustment.

A Wider Conversation About Menopause and Employment

The case arrives amid continuing discussion about menopause and working life.

Many people remain in employment while experiencing perimenopause or menopause symptoms, meaning workplace policies and management practices can have a significant effect on their ability to remain in their careers.

For employees, the case demonstrates the importance of documenting workplace concerns and making health-related requests clearly.

For employers, it highlights the importance of responding carefully, consistently and fairly when workers disclose medical conditions or ask for changes to their working arrangements.

The £32,237 award is therefore about more than the financial figure. The tribunal's decision draws attention to the potential consequences when an employee's health-related difficulties are not properly considered.

As awareness of menopause in the workplace continues to grow, employers and employees alike are likely to pay closer attention to reasonable adjustments, workplace equality and the importance of creating working environments where people can discuss health concerns without fear of being disadvantaged.

Disclaimer

This article is provided for general information and commentary purposes only. It is not legal, medical or employment advice. Employment rights can depend on the specific circumstances of each case, and readers should seek advice from a qualified solicitor, employment adviser or appropriate professional before taking action based on information in this article. The compensation figures and case details are presented based on the source material provided and should not be interpreted as establishing a general entitlement to compensation for menopause-related workplace issues.