The complainant in this case was subject to two disciplinary processes although only one was raised as part of her complaint.  She complained that the precautionary suspension applied to her was discriminatory but the Equality Officer found that the respondent had been operating within its disciplinary policy.  The complainant also complained that the application of one of those disciplinary processes to her was discriminatory in nature as others could also have been involved in the alleged forgery but they, who differed in race, were not investigated.  This aspect of her claim was upheld as the Equality Officer found that in the absence of an explanation as to why the complainant was the only person investigated, added to the fact that she was the only African person in the department, meant she, the Equality Officer, must consider that race was a contributing factor.

The remaining allegations made by the complainant were not upheld including

1. allegations of discrimination in relation to disciplinary issues around the misuse of the BT landline,
2. allegations of an attempt to dismiss the complainant by the inclusion of her suspension period in the calculation of absences when in fact the complainant had submitted sick certs for the period,
3. alleged discriminatory exclusion from pay rises while on maternity leave; and finally
4. continued contacts from the respondent to the complainant about return to work or the implementation of PHI while the complainant was pregnant.

The complainant was awarded €13000 taking account of the precautionary suspension of the complainant and her removal from the place of work.