This case involved an appeal by the complainant against the Adjudication Officer's decision that his complaint of penalisation was not well-founded. The complainant submitted that he made two protected disclosures within the meaning of the Act and alleges that he was penalised as a consequence of making the protected disclosure.

In particular, he claimed that this was evident by the fact he was transferred to a new role which he considered a demotion. He alleged that as a result of his new role he was marginalised and lost standing in the eyes of his colleagues. However, he did not suffer a reduction in salary or benefits.

The respondent denied that the transfer was as a result of the protected disclosures, and submitted it was for operational reasons only and part of wider series of staff transfers which saw 16 senior-level staff being transferred within a 4-month period. They further submitted that his new role was appropriate to his grading level and he carried out functions and responsibilities on par with other divisional managers at his level.

The Court agreed that both disclosures were protected under the Act, but found that the complainant had not made out the case that his reassignment constituted a detriment as per the Act. The Court held that his transfer occurred in the normal way and was part of a routine and legitimate reorganisation of staff to meet the public body's changing needs, which did not result in any monetary reduction. Accordingly, the appeal failed and the Adjudication Officer's decision was affirmed.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2018/May/PDD184.html