This complaint relates to a prison officer who alleged discrimination on the grounds of race and disability in respect of a selection process in which he was unsuccessful. Following the lodgement of his complaint with the Tribunal he alleged he was victimised because of that complaint. The respondent argued that neither the disability nor the victimisation claims were properly before the Equality Officer. In respect of the disability aspect the respondent argued that the complainant has a BSc and was at the time studying for a law degree and given his level of knowledge there could be no explanation for his failure to identify disability on the original complaint form. The Equality Officer was satisfied that the nature of the complaint (of discrimination) was merely expanded upon in the submission in compliance with the Louth VEC Judgement. Notwithstanding that she granted an extension of time for referring the disability complaint under Section 77 of the Acts. In respect of the victimisation claim the Equality Officer accepted the reference to victimisation in the complainant’s submission as a new complaint and found that the matter was validly before her. The Decision contains a useful consideration of the selection process, particularly on the age ground, and upheld the allegations of discrimination on the age ground in respect of that process. The complainant’s allegations of discrimination in the selection process on the disability ground were also upheld. The Equality Officer found the complainant’s version of events more compelling given inconsistencies in the respondent evidence. In terms of victimisation, the Equality Officer not only upheld the allegations but went on to consider and uphold an incident that occurred after the submission was made grounding the complaints of victimisation and just three days before the first day of hearing. Notably, the Labour Court decision in Cork VEC and Hurley does not appear to have been raised by the respondent. While difficulties for complainants in respect of repeatedly lodging complaints in respect of more recent incidents are noted, as are the administrative difficulties for the employment infrastructure in tracking a multitude of complaints in respect of continuing incidents involving the same parties, it remains to be seen how this issue of events postdating the complaint will be settled in future case law. The Equality Officer ordered redress of €33,000 for discriminatory treatment (on the age and disability grounds) and €47,000 for victimisation. Why is this case of interest?  It contains an Equality Officer’s considerations of a selection process.  Matters post-dating the complaint, and the submission, were considered and findings made in respect of them which would appear, on the face of it, to be at odds with the Hurley Labour Court Decision.

Find the Decision here: http://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2013/August/DEC-E2013-090- Full_Case_Report.html