A part-time employee was unfairly dismissed by text after an inspection and successfully proved sexual harassment and unequal treatment, resulting in compensation and orders for policy reforms.

The Complainant had been employed by the Respondent as a meat trimmer from June 2023 until July 2024. She said she was the only part-time worker, averaging about 22 hours a week. She was never given a written contract, handbook or policies, although full-time colleagues were. She stated that she had been promised that the Respondent would obtain a work permit so she could work full-time, but no application was progressed despite repeated requests. The Complainant was paid less than male trimmers and said her wages were frequently delayed while others were paid on time. After a joint Revenue and immigration inspection in June 2024, she was told informally to stay at home. Her messages to her Supervisor, Manager and HR seeking shifts and overdue wages went largely unanswered until mid-July 2024, when she received a WhatsApp message from HR stating that she was fired because there was no work and the Respondent could not afford her.

The Respondent did not attend the WRC hearing and put forward no written submissions or witnesses. Its position could only be inferred from the WhatsApp messages and the dismissal text sent by HR. In those communications, the Respondent indicated that, following the June 2024 inspection, it did not wish to call in “illegal” or part-time staff and claimed that there was no work or hours available for the Complainant and that it could not pay “that much workers”. The Respondent did not allege misconduct, performance issues or redundancy, and produced no objective criteria to justify selecting the Complainant for dismissal. Nor did it provide evidence of any genuine legal impediment to her continuing to work. By failing to attend the hearing, the Respondent chose not to contest the Complainant’s evidence, not to explain the wage delays, and not to demonstrate that any fair process had been followed before terminating her employment.

The Adjudicating Officer accepted the Complainant’s uncontested evidence and found that she had been dismissed within the meaning of the Unfair Dismissals Act by way of a brief text message, without prior warning, explanation or procedure. As the Respondent neither attended nor advanced any justification, it failed to discharge the statutory burden of proving substantial grounds for dismissal. No investigation, disciplinary process, consultation or formal meeting had taken place. The Complainant had been left for weeks after the inspection repeatedly seeking work and wages. The Adjudicator held that the dismissal was both substantively and procedurally unfair and awarded compensation of €6,540, representing approximately 20 weeks’ loss. In addition, the Adjudicator upheld the Complainant’s claims of sexual harassment and less favourable treatment as a part-time worker, awarding separate compensation and directing the Respondent to implement compliant anti-harassment and part-time equality policies. Reinstatement or re-engagement was rejected as inappropriate given the breakdown in trust.

Employers should:                

• Ensure that any termination of employment is grounded on clear, lawful reasons and preceded by a fair process. Inspections by Revenue, Gardaí or immigration authorities do not justify sidelining workers or “quietly” ending their employment by text. Before dismissing any employee, an employer should identify the alleged reason, invite the employee to a meeting, allow representation, consider their response, and communicate a reasoned outcome and appeal. Failure to do so places the employer at serious risk of an unfair dismissal finding.         
  
  
• Maintain robust, written policies on dignity at work, harassment and sexual harassment, and actively enforce them. Owners and Directors are treated in law as the Respondent itself; their conduct will almost always be attributed to the employer. Training should make clear that using control over hours, pay or work permits to seek personal or sexual favours is unlawful, even if framed as a “private” arrangement. Employees should have safe reporting routes beyond their direct line manager. 
  
  
• Monitor pay and conditions to ensure that part-time staff are not paid late, denied contracts or treated as disposable.

The full case can be found here.