This case involved a claim that the complainant was subjected to harassment, discrimination and victimisation in the course of her employment. She claimed these were by way of persistent disrespectful remarks about her heritage and culture and was requested to change her name to a more Irish name. She claimed that she had been summarily dismissed as a reaction to her making a complaint of discrimination on race grounds.

She alleged that the respondent's Managing Director had advised her to improve her knowledge of the English language, to alter her accent so as to sound more Irish, to write emails so it would appear that an Irish person was writing them and to adopt a more Irish name. She also claimed that the MD changed her email address, without her consent, so that this new name would appear as her email address. She also stated that the MD made consistent derogatory remarks about her native country and belittled her heritage and culture. The complainant said that she did not make a complaint as the MD was the only other person working in the office and she needed his support for her visa application.

Within a few weeks of her commencing employment she was summoned to a meeting with the MD and he raised concerns about her performance. She disputed these claims as she alleged that she had exceeded her target in the first month of her employment and built up a data base for the respondent. She was subsequently forced to sign a termination letter and the respondent allegedly took 80% of the contact details out of her diary, which she had independently sourced prior to this employment.

The respondent claimed that there had been problems with the complainant's telephone manner and that she was hesitant about making business development calls. They also claimed that she was often late for work and lacked attention to detail. The respondent stated that he never suggested/ asked for the complainant to change her name and that it was in fact the complainant who had suggested she adopt a more Irish sounding name and to change her email details. The respondent stated that he had set up the meeting to convey his concerns and explain how they might be addressed. He said that this meeting was not part of the disciplinary process, however, following the complainant's reaction to his comments, and the fact she stated that she had only been joking about a name change, the respondent felt he had lost all trust and confidence in her and decided to terminate her employment. He also claimed that he removed the client details from the complainant's diary with her consent, and this was corroborated by a 3rd party who was present on the day in question.

The respondent disputed any racial motives for the termination of the complainant's employment and stated that the complainant had not reached her targets as no monies invoiced by her were realisable until after she had left. The Adjudication Officer found that the evidence advanced by the complainant did not transfer the probative burden of proof to the respondent in respect of her harassment or discrimination claims. However, they found that the dismissal was an act of victimisation as the complainant had reluctantly changed her name for the respondent- being something she was made to do because of her race. She was then adversely treated by being dismissed and the Court held this dismissal was in reaction to her complaint of discrimination, being that she changed her name for them. Accordingly, she was awarded 6 months' salary as compensation for the breach.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/Cases/2018/March/ADJ-00008025.html