• Complainant: Mary Tracy
• Respondent: Smurfit Kappa Ireland Ltd t/a The Educational Company of Ireland

WRC awarded employee €35,000 for employer’s failure to provide reasonable accommodations for the employee’s disability.

The Complainant, an educational sales representative with Lupus SLE, alleged disability discrimination and victimisation under the Employment Equality Act 1998. Diagnosed in 2013, her condition caused joint pain, impacting her ability to fulfil manual handling duties. Despite informing the Respondent of her condition in 2022, the Complainant faced limited engagement and insufficient accommodations. The Respondent introduced a driver and lifting support in March 2023, but maintained lifting was an essential duty. Following occupational health recommendations for a 3kg lifting restriction, the Respondent deemed her role unviable.

On 20 June 2023, the Complainant was informed her role was not sustainable, and an alternative position was proposed. Feeling unqualified and overwhelmed by the new role's scope, she declined to pursue it. The Respondent terminated her employment on 22 August 2023, citing her inability to perform essential duties. The Complainant subsequently secured alternative employment in November 2023 with reduced pay and benefits but managed similar duties with accommodations. The Complainant argued the Respondent failed to assess her ability to perform her role with reasonable accommodations, pre-judged her situation, and failed to engage in good faith. She experienced significant stress, financial loss, and emotional distress because of the Respondent’s flawed processes and discriminatory dismissal.

The Respondent rejected the Complainant’s claims of discrimination under the Employment Equality Act 1998, arguing that her dismissal was based on her inability to perform the essential duties of her role due to a 3kg lifting restriction. The Respondent acknowledged the Complainant’s medical condition, Lupus SLE, but contested whether it constituted a disability under the Act. The Complainant’s accommodations, including assigning a colleague to handle lifting, were deemed inadequate by her, while the Respondent insisted it went beyond its obligations. The Respondent also offered an alternative role, which the Complainant declined, citing unsuitability.

The Adjudicator found that the Respondent failed to meet its obligations under s.16 of the Employment Equality Acts 1998–2015 by not adequately assessing or providing reasonable accommodations for the Complainant's disability. The termination was deemed a discriminatory dismissal, as the Respondent’s decision was based on the perception that the Complainant was incapable of fulfilling her duties due to her disability. However, there was no evidence that the dismissal or the appeals process was a reaction to equality proceedings initiated in July 2023 and dismissed the victimisation claim. The WRC awarded the Complainant €35,000 in compensation for the effects of disability discrimination, including the loss of occupational integration, financial loss, and emotional distress.

Employers should:

• Engage Actively in Accommodation Discussions: Employers must meaningfully engage with employees who have disclosed disabilities to explore reasonable accommodations. This includes thoroughly assessing the employee’s ability to perform essential duties with adjustments and documenting these assessments. Failing to genuinely consult and collaborate can lead to claims of discrimination.
  
• Conduct Comprehensive Reviews of Roles and Alternative Positions: When proposing alternative roles, ensure they are tailored to the employee’s abilities and qualifications. Avoid presenting roles perceived as unsuitable or overwhelming, as this may indicate a lack of genuine effort to accommodate the employee within the organisation.
  
• Implement Transparent and Fair Processes: Ensure internal review and decision-making processes are unbiased and comply with statutory obligations under equality legislation. Clear communication, timely updates, and opportunities for employee input are critical in avoiding claims of pre-judged or discriminatory outcomes.

The full case can be found here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2025/january/adj-00048355.html