Katlyn Winston

Rotunda Hospital

WRC held that employee’s resignation did not amount to constructive dismissal and employer acted reasonably following an incident of sexual harassment.

The Complainant began working as a maternity care assistant at the hospital in January 2022, earning €31,000. In May 2022, she alleged that a theatre porter, referred to as Mr X, placed his hands on her waist inappropriately while she worked in the theatre department. She lodged a formal complaint under the hospital’s Dignity at Work Policy, and an independent investigation later upheld her allegation of sexual harassment. Following this, Mr X was issued a final written warning in February 2023 and reassigned to a different role with loss of his theatre allowance. Thereafter, the Complainant was on sick leave from mid-November 2022 but returned to work in mid-February 2023. The next day, she saw Mr X in the hospital and became distressed, prompting her to go on sick leave again and ultimately resign in early May. In her resignation letter, she cited a lack of support and failure to ensure her safety. She claimed that she had not been informed of Mr X’s disciplinary outcome and felt unsafe and unsupported. In her complaints under the Unfair Dismissals Act and Employment Equality Act, she argued that her resignation amounted to constructive dismissal and alleged gender-based discrimination.

The Respondent argued that the Complainant’s resignation did not meet the legal criteria for constructive dismissal under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977. They submitted that the hospital neither breached the Complainant’s contract nor acted unreasonably, and therefore, the resignation was not justified. They claimed the hospital followed its Dignity at Work Policy, conducted a fair investigation into the Complainant’s complaint, and imposed disciplinary sanctions on Mr X. They also asserted that the Complainant failed to exhaust internal grievance procedures before resigning, which undermined her claim. Further, in response to the discrimination claim, the Respondent argued that the Complainant failed to establish less favourable treatment on the gender ground. The Respondent maintained that the hospital took reasonable steps to prevent harassment and was not vicariously liable under the Employment Equality Acts. The Respondent held that appropriate measures were implemented, including staff training and the relocation of Mr X. Consequently, it was submitted that the Complainant was neither constructively dismissed nor discriminated against.

The Adjudicator found that the Complainant’s resignation did not amount to constructive dismissal under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977. While acknowledging the emotional difficulty faced by the Complainant following an incident of sexual harassment, the decision concluded that the hospital acted reasonably. The Adjudicator noted that the Complainant did not avail of internal grievance procedures or request further accommodations before resigning. It was held that the hospital did not breach a fundamental term of her contract or act so unreasonably that she had no option but to resign. Regarding the discrimination claim under the Employment Equality Act 1998, the complaint was found to be submitted outside the statutory time limit. As a result, the Adjudicator ruled there was no jurisdiction to consider the complaint. Both claims were dismissed.

• Employers should ensure that all staff are fully informed of the internal procedures available for raising grievances, particularly in cases such as allegations of harassment. Employees must be encouraged to use informal and formal resolution, and managers should document all guidance provided, including offers of support or mediation.
  
  

• In cases where allegations are upheld, clear communication with the complainant is essential. Without breaching confidentiality, employers should provide reassurance that appropriate disciplinary action has been taken and outline the steps implemented to prevent further distress, such as reassignment or rostering changes.

• Employers must review the physical and psychological safety of returning employees. Offering tailored return-to-work plans, ongoing support, and regular check-ins can help rebuild relationships. A proactive approach to post-incident management may reduce the risk of constructive dismissal claims and demonstrate compliance with duties under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work 2005 Act.

The full case can be found here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2025/march/adj-00045937.html