The Complainant was employed as a Social Care Worker with the Respondent. She commenced work on the 4th of April 2004 and her employment was terminated on the 24th of September 2019. The Complainant brought her application to the WRC claiming that she was discriminated against on grounds of Age and Disability and subjected to a discriminatory dismissal. The Complainant also submitted that the Respondent failed to make reasonable accommodation for her.

The Complainant stated that she had worked from 2004 to 2016 in the RENUA care facility. In July 2016 the Complainant was most unfortunately seriously injured in a road Traffic Accident and although she initially recovered well, she was left with on-going conditions which the Complainant argued met the definition of disability.  In January 2017, the Complainant reported back to work at RENUA but was informed that here was no longer a position there for her. She was directed to move to a position in Marian House – a Campus facility. The Complainant argued that this proposed move was an act of age discrimination, that the Respondent was trying to force her out of employment by transferring her.

In relation to this the Respondent argued that due to changes within the services of the organisation the Complainant was aware that her role in RENUA was not long term.  The Complainant objected to the move on the grounds that her medical situation was not really suitable for the type of work (physically challenging Clients, Disruptive Physical behaviours etc) she would possibly be exposed to at a Campus style facility. After discussions with the Respondent, it was agreed that the Complainant could move to a position at Deansgate, a day care facility. Despite initial reservations, the Complainant found the position much to her liking and was happy to remain there. It was the Complainant’s evidence that the Respondent assured her that she could work there until her retirement, while the Respondent argued that this was a temporary arrangement to get her back to work.

The Respondent was keen that the Complainant should work in other facilities which would include 24/7 rosters and weekend working and would be community-based work.  The Complainant wished to remain where she was and argued that it was a reasonable accommodation because of her disability to allow her to do so.  During the period that the Complainant was employed in Deansgate she underwent a number of occupational health referrals which always indicted that the Complainant was fit for work but the question of the range of duties and the location became problematic in terms of a proper interpretation of the Reports. Eventually a final OH reported indicated that the Complainant was not fit for the full duties of a Social Care Worker as set out in a detailed job description supplied and it was on this “Unfitness to work” basis that the dismissal took place.

The Respondent maintained that the Complainant had been dismissed by letter dated the 31st July 2019. The dismissal was based on comprehensive medical reports and subsequent clarifications from him that the Complainant was medically unfit for the duties of a Social Care Worker.   The Dismissal was appealed and confirmed following an Appeal hearing in August 2019. The Respondent submitted that all rules of Natural Justice were observed throughout the proceedings.

The Adjudication Officer considered that the Complainant was 69 years and four months, approximately, at the date of the employment ending. The normal retirement date in the Employer was 65 years of age. It was therefore only reasonable to conclude that a Discrimination complaint on Age Grounds, does not really have a prima facie basis in this particular claim.

However, the Adjudication Officer took the view that Discrimination took place by a failure to provide Reasonable Accommodation for the Complainant as they had refused to allow her to continue in the Deansgate pattern of work and insisting on a full Social care Worker range of duties, for which her disability made her ineligible.

As there was a Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation, the Adjudication Officer awarded the sum of €20,000 Compensation to be made in favour of the Complainant.  The Adjudication Officer also made an award of €5,000 where an act of Discriminatory Dismissal took place.

Guidance for Employers

It is key that Employers make reasonable accommodation for their employees in circumstances where they may need to move to a different position within the company. Despite the fact that the Respondent in this case had medical evidence to support their decision to dismiss the Complainant, the Adjudication Officer still found against them as they did not make sufficient effort to accommodate their employee.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2022/february/adj-00026213adj-00026213.html