Eanna Donoghue v eBay Europe Services Ltd [2025]
Decision Number: ADJ-00053831 Legal Body: Workplace Relations Commission
Published on: 03/06/2025
Article Authors The main content of this article was provided by the following authors.
Patrick Barrett BL Barrister-at-Law
Patrick Barrett BL Barrister-at-Law
Patrick barrett case reviews

The Bar of Ireland

Orchard Way, Killarney V93Y9W9.
DX: 51010 Killarney 
Tel: (087) 4361270

Patrick's legal education is robust, beginning with a BCL Law Degree from University College Cork (2012-2016), followed by an LL.M in Business Law from the same institution (2016-2017), and culminating in a Barrister-at-Law Degree from The Honorable Society of King’s Inns in Dublin (2019-2021). He has extensive experience on the South-West Circuit, handling Civil, Family, and Criminal Law cases, as well as advising the Citizen Advice Service.  He has worked as an employment consultant, dealing with workplace investigations and bankruptcy procedures.

Complainant:
Eanna Donoghue
Respondent:
eBay Europe Services Ltd
Summary

eBay employee quit after being written up for failing to explain 4 minutes of inactivity on his computer to his manager's satisfaction has lost his claim for constructive dismissal in the WRC.

Background

The Complainant, a long-serving eBay customer support agent, claimed constructive dismissal after receiving a written warning for four minutes of unexplained inactivity at work. He argued the reprimand was unreasonable given personal tragedies at the time, including the death of a close friend. He believed the disciplinary action stemmed from grievances he had raised against two managers. He also referenced informal counselling for lateness, which he attributed to unreliable public transport. Feeling unfairly targeted, he resigned on 5 March 2024, the day the warning was upheld, stating he could not tolerate the work environment any longer.

The Respondent defended the claim, stating the warning was issued for legitimate performance concerns, specifically failure to explain inactivity beyond 60 seconds, which they considered work avoidance. His manager said he ignored opportunities to explain the delay and failed to use repeated scheduled time for clarification. The Respondent submitted he had eight instances of lateness and argued he did not engage with internal grievance procedures before resigning. The disciplinary action, including the written warning, was upheld through a formal appeal. The Respondent maintained he was not constructively dismissed and had alternatives to resignation.

Outcome

The Adjudicating Officer dismissed the complaint of constructive dismissal; whilst she acknowledged the Complainant’s personal difficulties, they found that the written warning was a proportionate response to a genuine work issue - particularly given the unexplained four-minute inactivity. The Adjudicator noted he had not submitted a grievance before resigning and concluded that resignation was not his only option. They found no evidence of targeted behaviour or unfair treatment, stating that the manager was performing her duties appropriately. Further, failure to follow internal procedures or raise the issue formally weakened the claim.

Practical Guidance
  • This case underscores the importance of clear performance standards and consistent application of disciplinary procedures. Employers should ensure that expectations are well-documented and explained to all staff. Where monitoring tools like screen recordings are used, policies should clarify how data will be assessed and what constitutes a breach. However, procedural fairness must always accompany performance management.  
  • Employees should be given reasonable opportunity to explain alleged misconduct, and managers must document all interactions. If personal difficulties are cited, employers should respond while maintaining professional standards (e.g., offering support services or accommodations where possible). Moreover, before imposing disciplinary sanctions, ensure that employees are aware of their right to raise grievances. This not only protects compliance but may also resolve misunderstandings early on.  
  • Finally, employers should train managers in handling sensitive issues fairly and consistently. Constructive dismissal claims can often be avoided when employees feel heard and treated equitably. A robust grievance process allows concerns to be addressed internally before reaching the point of resignation. Employers should try foster a culture of openness and procedural fairness to maintain morale and mitigate risk.


The full case can be found here:
https://workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2025/may/adj-00053831.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 03/06/2025
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 →