Background: 
The Complainant alleged discrimination and victimisation under the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015. She was diagnosed with breast cancer in January 2023 and had requested to work from home during chemotherapy to avoid infection risks. This was denied by her employer, who required all staff to return on-site. Although offered a separate office, she found this unsuitable due to shared toilet facilities. Consequently, she felt forced to apply for Critical Illness Provision (CIP) despite being fit to work from home. The Complainant also claimed that her wages were unfairly reduced during the summer, and her timesheet approvals caused significant stress due to repeated delays. Furthermore, she argued that she was overlooked for a Coordinator role in August 2023 due to her disability and that the employer's actions amounted to victimisation for raising concerns.

The Complainant’s line manager testified that the employer could have accommodated her request to work from home but chose not to, leading the Complainant to believe her only options were unsafe office work or sick leave. Further, in testimony, it was stated they allowed the Complainant to work from home due to illness until a Directive required a return to the office by 1 April 2023. The manager noted that the Complainant’s dissatisfaction with work-from-home arrangements and payroll issues could have been resolved; also, that no formal request for reasonable accommodation was received. It was testified that although the Complainant was initially facilitated in working from home, it could not continue indefinitely, nor were any formal medical requests for such accommodation received. HR confirmed that the Complainant was never certified as fit to work and thus, working from home was not considered. The Respondent refuted all allegations of discrimination and victimisation, arguing that the Complainant failed to establish a prima facie case and that no comparator was provided. However, they acknowledged a pay discrepancy and agreed to pay the Complainant €2,432.52 gross, as committed by her line manager.

Finding:
The Adjudicating Officer outlined that the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015 prohibit discrimination based on disability and protect employees from retaliation for asserting their rights. Disability is broadly defined, covering physical, mental, and psychological conditions. Legally, discrimination occurs when an individual is treated less favourably due to their disability compared to someone without a disability or with a different disability. Therefore, employers must provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities unless it imposes a disproportionate burden.

In this case, the Complainant alleged three instances of disability discrimination. Namely, refusal of reasonable accommodation, being overlooked for a job promotion, and a reduction in pay during sick leave. The Adjudication Officer found no evidence of discrimination or victimisation. The Complainant's claim of being overlooked for promotion was unsupported by evidence, and the reduction in pay was deemed consistent with standard practices, unrelated to disability. Consequently, the complaint was not upheld as the alleged discriminatory acts did not occur within the relevant time-period, and the complainant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.