Case 1

Diane Winship is a 35-year-old accountant who worked for a City firm, Goldenberg Hehmeyer. In April 2003, she took leave to have a baby. Ms Winship claims that she was told she could return to work after four months maternity leave on a part time basis. In July, Ms Winship claims that she received a message from her boss giving her a deadline to decide whether to return to work full time. Ms Winship claims that her boss went back on the agreement to allow her to return to work part time. In August 2003 the company told her that her complaints about the way she was treated, including calling her boss a liar, was causing the company damage. In September she was sacked.

Ralph Goldenberg, Ms Winship's boss claims that the issue about her returning to work on a part time basis was a misunderstanding and that he believed this only referred to the terms of her maternity leave. When Ms Winship began making comments about the firm and about him in particular he felt that he had no choice but to dismiss her as she was poisoning the atmosphere of the firm. Dr Janet Shlaes, one of the directors was also questioned at the Industrial Tribunal hearing Ms Winship's case. She sanctioned the dismissal and said that she focused her attention on Ms Winship's behaviour rather than the nature of her complaint that may have driven her to make the alleged comments.

Ms Winship is still looking for a job and was apparently told by someone at a Job Centre to remove the reference to her baby daughter from her CV if she wanted to stand any chance of getting a job.

Goldenberg Hehmeyer denied sex discrimination and unfair dismissal.

Case 2

Stephanie Villalba worked for investment bankers Merrill Lynch for 17 years. Her most recent job was managing high profile private clients in Europe - high profile meaning they had nothing less than £500,000 to invest. Ms Villalba was made redundant last year amidst claims that the department she headed was making significant losses and that she was not up to the challenges facing the department in the current economic climate.

Ms Villalba is suing Merrill Lynch for sex discrimination, unequal pay and unfair dismissal. She claims that there is a culture of institutional sexism in the firm, that she was the subject of numerous belittling and sexist comments, including a suggestion that she act as a stewardess to six male colleagues whilst on a business trip in one of the firm's private jets, that colleagues in similar positions were offered better bonuses than she was (the differences in the region of £100,000 - £130,000) and that she was forced out of her position because of the attitude of her line manager who had a problem with women in senior roles in the firm.

Merrill Lynch plan to fly in 22 high-ranking executives to defend their case and to press the claim that Ms Villalba was not up to the job.