Complainant: A Clerical Officer

Respondent: A Government Department

The WRC awarded €15,000 to employee for discrimination on grounds of disability.

The Complainant, who had an acquired brain injury, sought employment assistance from a social enterprise supporting individuals with disabilities. Through the Public Appointments Service, he secured a clerical officer role in a Government Department, starting in June 2022. Before his commencement, the Department’s disability liaison officer liaised with the social enterprise to ensure appropriate accommodations. The Complainant requested clear instructions, a quiet environment, and additional time for some tasks. Initially, his probation reviews at three and six months were satisfactory. However, in March 2023, he sent his manager an email with an attached personal book extract containing explicit content. She reported discomfort, leading to his reassignment and remote work. An investigation followed, though the Complainant was not directly involved. At his final probation review in May 2023, he apologised but maintained that the content was not explicitly inappropriate. Later that week, the Department deemed his probation unsuccessful due to a breach of policy. His appeal was denied, and his employment was terminated mid-June. He alleged discrimination, arguing that the Department disregarded his disability’s impact on judgment.

The Respondent acknowledged the Complainant’s disability was known before his start date and had provided various supports. For instance, when the Complainant struggled with the clocking system, management allowed him to work set hours. During his first probation review in September 2022, his manager noted that the role had previously been held by an executive officer, making it challenging for a clerical officer. Consequently, complex tasks were reassigned. Following his January 2023 probation review, the Complainant began reporting to a new manager. On March 9th, he sent that manager an email containing an extract from his book, leading to his reassignment to remote work. The Respondent admitted that this issue was not addressed until his final probation review in May. At the review, the Complainant did not cite his disability as a defence but raised it in his appeal. They emphasised that the Complainant’s probation was unsuccessful due to conduct, not disability. He referenced policies stating that probation could be terminated at any time with notice. The Complainant had not demonstrated that he met the required standards. The Department maintained that it was the employee’s responsibility to define any disability-related accommodations, which the Complainant had not done regarding judgment.

The Adjudicator found that the Department treated him differently by sending him to the social enterprise office instead of following standard disciplinary procedures. Further, it ruled that the Complainant was discriminated against by not being given the opportunity to explain his conduct through formal disciplinary channels. While reinstatement was considered, it was rejected due to his performance concerns. Instead, the Department was ordered to pay €15,000 in compensation, equivalent to six months’ salary, for the effects of the discrimination.

1. Employers should ensure that employees with disabilities receive reasonable accommodations tailored to their specific needs. This includes proactively discussing potential challenges and making accommodations that enable them to perform their duties effectively. In this case, the Complainant did not initially request accommodations for impaired judgment, highlighting the importance of open communication and continuous assessment.
    
   

2. When addressing conduct issues, employers should follow standard disciplinary procedures, regardless of an employee’s disability. Deviating from these procedures, as seen in this case, can lead to claims of differential treatment. Employees should be given a fair opportunity to respond to concerns, show improvement, and understand the consequences of their actions.  
   

3. Finally, employers should document all accommodations provided and decisions made, ensuring compliance with employment laws. Seeking medical or expert advice when an employee’s disability may impact behaviour can prevent misunderstandings.

The full case can be found here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2025/february/adj-00049202.html