This appeal was brought by the complainant Ms. Byrne in respect of a Tribunal decision which had not upheld her claims of discrimination.  Although the Tribunal Decision appears to have been anonymised, from the content it appears to be DEC-E2013-033.

The complainant suffered from a phobia of rodents and her workplace suffered an infestation of rodents following ground development work on an an adjacent site.  Both the Tribunal and the Labour Court accepted that the complainant suffered from a disability.  While the Tribunal Decision provides more of the medical information submitted it remains unclear whether it is appropriate to consider phobias generally to be disability or whether the nature of the impact of the phobia on the complainant in this case is what renders it a disability.  On that basis it is unclear whether the decision has general application or is based on the facts of this case only.

The Labour Court found that the respondent had failed to provide reasonable accommodation because it had failed to assess the accommodation sought by the complainant, had come to no conclusion as to whether the accommodation sought was reasonable and because she was not informed and remained unaware of the resolution of the problem (by poison).

On the basis of one interaction with a raised voice and a reference to the complainant’s ‘little friends’ the claim of harassment was upheld.

The Court’s treatment of victimisation is more complex.  It accepted that the letter issued to the complainant on 25 August 2010, giving her two weeks notice that her pay while still on sick leave would end, had a real purpose.  However, it found that it could not be read in isolation.  The Court notes that the complainant’s solicitor wrote to the respondent on 2 September 2010 and that the decision to remove her pay while still on sick leave was implemented on 13 September 2010.  It states “Accordingly the Court finds that the manner in which that decision was given effect to was influenced by the letter the complainant’s solicitor’s wrote to the company on 2 September as it failed to follow through on its commitments set out in the letter of 25th August…”

The Equality Officer found that the respondent was on notice of the complainant’s disability from 29 July 2010 and if that was indeed the case then the decision in August 2010 respect of payment for sick leave would seem questionable.  However, the Equality Officer also mentioned an entitlement to statutory sick pay and neither this nor the terms of her employment contract appear to have been considered by the Labour Court in terms of her entitlements in light of the company’s loss making situation.

The Court went on “On the balance of probabilities the Court finds that the company decided to dismiss the complainant as a means of dealing with the Employment Equality issues she was raising.”

While of course it is interesting to consider the decisions of both the Tribunal and the court relating to the same situation it should be remembered that the Labour Court hearing of the case is a de novo hearing.

The complaints were upheld by the Court and the complainant was awarded €20,000, setting aside the Equality Officer Decision.

Why this case is of interest

• The acceptance of a phobia at Labour Court level as a disability

Read the full case review here:

http://www.labourcourt.ie/en/Cases/2014/January/EDA143.html