Latest in Employment Law>Case Law>A Worker v A Company [2011]
A Worker v A Company [2011]
Published on: 23/09/2011
Issues Covered: Discrimination
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Legal Island
Legal Island
{}
Background

The complainant submitted that he commenced working for the respondent on 14 October 2008. Before that, he had gone through a lengthy application process, including three interviews with staff of the respondent company at different levels of seniority. The complainant received a number of standard induction materials, but it was not until two days later that he was asked to fill in an application form. On this form, there was a question about existing illnesses. The complainant disclosed that he suffers from epilepsy. The complainant assured his supervisor that the condition was well controlled through medication. Two days later he was asked to leave on health and safety grounds.

The respondent stated that it was agreed that the complainant should be assigned a guardian function temporarily until this matter had been determined. When the supervisor explained this, the complainant left and did not return.

The EO weighed up all the oral and written evidence and concluded:

"I am satisfied that the respondent made no effort whatsoever to consult with the complainant, and to find out details about how his disability affected him or would affect him on the job, before deciding on his dismissal. I am further satisfied, on the evidence of both the complainant and Mr. B., that the static guard job offered to the complainant was not on the same terms and conditions as the job for which the complainant had been hired, and can therefore not be said to be reasonable accommodation within the meaning of the Acts. I am therefore satisfied that the communication to the complainant, that he could not continue to work for the respondent in the role for which he had been hired only three days earlier, constitutes discriminatory dismissal on the ground of the complainant's disability, and that the complainant is entitled to succeed."

He awarded the complainant €25,000, or slightly less than what the complainant would have earned potentially in one year in the respondent's employment.

http://www.equalitytribunal.ie/Database-of-Decisions/2011/Employment-Equality-Decisions/DEC-E2011-149-Full-Case-Report.html

Continue reading

We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.

Already a subscriber?

Please log in to view the full article.

What you'll get:

  • Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
  • Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
  • 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
  • Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team

Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial

Disclaimer The information in this article is provided as part of Legal Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article. This article is correct at 23/09/2011
Q&A
Legal Island’s LMS, licensed to you Imagine your staff having 24/7 access to a centralised training platform, tailored to your organisation’s brand and staff training needs, with unlimited users. Learn more →